  Classical confidence intervals after best subset selection are widely
implemented in statistical software and are routinely used to guide
practitioners in scientific fields to conclude significance. However, there are
increasing concerns in the recent literature about the validity of these
confidence intervals in that the intended frequentist coverage is not attained.
In the context of the Akaike information criterion (AIC), recent studies
observe an under-coverage phenomenon in terms of overfitting, where the
estimate of error variance under the selected submodel is smaller than that for
the true model. Under-coverage is particularly troubling in selective inference
as it points to inflated Type I errors that would invalidate significant
findings. In this article, we delineate a complementary, yet provably more
deciding factor behind the incorrect coverage of classical confidence intervals
under AIC, in terms of altered conditional sampling distributions of pivotal
quantities. Resting on selective techniques developed in other settings, our
finite-sample characterization of the selection event under AIC uncovers its
geometry as a union of finitely many intervals on the real line, based on which
we derive new confidence intervals with guaranteed coverage for any sample
size. This geometry derived for AIC selection enables exact (and typically less
than exact) conditioning, circumventing the need for the excessive conditioning
common in other post-selection methods. The proposed methods are easy to
implement and can be broadly applied to other commonly used best subset
selection criteria. In an application to a classical US consumption dataset,
the proposed confidence intervals arrive at different conclusions compared to
the conventional ones, even when the selected model is the full model, leading
to interpretable findings that better align with empirical observations.
