No Free Delivery Service: Epistemic limits of passive data collection in complex social systems
Maximilian Nickel
Abstract
Rapid model validation via the train-test paradigm has been a key driver for the breathtaking progress in machine learning and AI. However, modern AI systems often depend on a combination of tasks and data collection practices that violate all assumptions ensuring test validity. Yet, without rigorous model validation we cannot ensure the intended outcomes of deployed AI systems, including positive social impact, nor continue to advance AI research in a scientifically sound way. In this paper, I will show that for widely considered inference settings in complex social systems the train-test paradigm does not only lack a justification but is indeed invalid for any risk estimator, including counterfactual and causal estimators, with high probability. These formal impossibility results highlight a fundamental epistemic issue, i.e., that for key tasks in modern AI we cannot know whether models are valid under current data collection practices. Importantly, this includes variants of both recommender systems and reasoning via large language models, and neither naïve scaling nor limited benchmarks are suited to address this issue. I am illustrating these results via the widely used MovieLens benchmark and conclude by discussing the implications of these results for AI in social systems, including possible remedies such as participatory data curation and open science.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Builds on7
- Are Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models a Mirage?Rylan Schaeffer, Brando Miranda, Sanmi KoyejoNeurIPS 2023 · 796 citations
- What Neural Networks Memorize and Why: Discovering the Long Tail via Influence EstimationVitaly Feldman, Chiyuan ZhangNeurIPS 2020 · 674 citations
- Efficient and Modular Implicit DifferentiationMathieu Blondel, Quentin Berthet, Marco Cuturi, Roy Frostig et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 386 citations
- Predictive Multiplicity in ClassificationCharles T. Marx, Flávio P. Calmon, Berk UstunICML 2020 · 197 citations
- Predictive Multiplicity in Probabilistic ClassificationJamelle Watson-Daniels, David C. Parkes, Berk UstunAAAI 2023 · 58 citations
Related papers
- Preference Learning for AI Alignment: a Causal PerspectiveKasia Kobalczyk, Mihaela van der SchaarICML 2025
- Context-Aware Testing: A New Paradigm for Model Testing with Large Language ModelsPaulius Rauba, Nabeel Seedat, Max Ruiz Luyten, Mihaela van der SchaarNeurIPS 2024 · 8 citations
- Ice Cream Doesn't Cause Drowning: Benchmarking LLMs Against Statistical Pitfalls in Causal InferenceJin Du, Li Chen, Xun Xian, An Luo et al.ICLR 2026 · 4 citations
- Red Teaming Large Reasoning ModelsJiawei Chen, Yang Yang, Chao Yu, Yu Tian et al.ACL 2026
- MovieGraph-ToM: Evaluating Long-Range Theory of Mind in Large Language Models via Implicit Social-Causal GraphsTingjiang Wei, Qin Ni, Rong Gao, Yingying Wang et al.AAAI 2026
