Certifying when decision-time information justifies adaptive experimentation
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.
Cite
@article{arxiv.2607.27651,
title = {Certifying when decision-time information justifies adaptive experimentation},
author = {Jia Bi and Samuel Pinilla and Chenyang Zhu},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.27651},
year = {2026}
}