mlsanityData to 13 Oct 2026

Improving Confidence Estimates for Unfamiliar Examples

arXiv 1804.03166 ↗First posted 9 Apr 2018cs.CV cs.LGcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Intuitively, unfamiliarity should lead to lack of confidence. In reality, current algorithms often make highly confident yet wrong predictions when faced with relevant but unfamiliar examples. A classifier we trained to recognize gender is 12 times more likely to be wrong with a 99% confident prediction if presented with a subject from a different age group than those seen during training. In this paper, we compare and evaluate several methods to improve confidence estimates for unfamiliar and familiar samples. We propose a testing methodology of splitting unfamiliar and familiar samples by attribute (age, breed, subcategory) or sampling (similar datasets collected by different people at different times). We evaluate methods including confidence calibration, ensembles, distillation, and a Bayesian model and use several metrics to analyze label, likelihood, and calibration error. While all methods reduce over-confident errors, the ensemble of calibrated models performs best overall, and T-scaling performs best among the approaches with fastest inference. Our code is available at https://github.com/lizhitwo/ConfidenceEstimates . colorredPlease see UPDATED ERRATA.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 9 Apr 2018.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 1.

2 papers.