MEGA Hub

Certifying when decision-time information justifies adaptive experimentation

Authors

Do you know Jia Bi?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Samuel Pinilla?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Chenyang Zhu?You can claim authorship or link another user.

Abstract

Adaptive laboratories choose measurements during experiments, yet most methods begin after adaptation is permitted. We introduce Opportunity-aware Policy Authorization for Laboratories (\OPAL{}), a framework that decides whether adaptation should be enabled at all. \OPAL{} uses a precommitted contract to require non-trivial adaptation, controlled target risk and positive executed value after cost. We establish an impossibility boundary: source outcomes and unlabelled target covariates cannot uniformly support non-trivial authorization under unrestricted conditional outcome shift, and derive a target-calibrated recovery. Applied to an unseen 11,265-compound Cell Painting partition, the frozen gate selected 595 compounds, captured 384 positive opportunities and achieved strictly positive executed value under least-favourable completion; its 5.18\% false-activation upper bound remained below a 7.5\% limit. Among six methods, only \OPAL{} combined non-zero activation with this risk control. Locked pharmacogenomic and finite-campaign studies distinguish policy misalignment from non-certifiability, establishing authorization as a distinct layer for safe adaptive science.

Community

00