mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Validity, consonant plausibility measures, and conformal prediction

arXiv 2001.09225 ↗First posted 24 Jan 2020math.ST stat.ML stat.THcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Prediction of future observations is an important and challenging problem. The two mainstream approaches for quantifying prediction uncertainty use prediction regions and predictive distributions, respectively, with the latter believed to be more informative because it can perform other prediction-related tasks. The standard notion of validity, what we refer to here as Type-1 validity, focuses on coverage probability of prediction regions, while a notion of validity relevant to the other prediction-related tasks performed by predictive distributions is lacking. Here we present a new notion, called Type-2 validity, relevant to these other prediction tasks. We establish connections between Type-2 validity and coherence properties, and show that imprecise probability considerations are required in order to achieve it. We go on to show that both types of prediction validity can be achieved by interpreting the conformal prediction output as the contour function of a consonant plausibility measure. We also offer an alternative characterization of conformal prediction, based on a new nonparametric inferential model construction, wherein the appearance of consonance is natural, and prove its validity.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 24 Jan 2020.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 1; 2024: 2; 2025: 3; 2026: 2.

9 papers.