Understanding the Under-Coverage Bias in Uncertainty Estimation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Estimating the data uncertainty in regression tasks is often done by learning a quantile function or a prediction interval of the true label conditioned on the input. It is frequently observed that quantile regression -- a vanilla algorithm for learning quantiles with asymptotic guarantees -- tends to under-cover than the desired coverage level in reality. While various fixes have been proposed, a more fundamental understanding of why this under-coverage bias happens in the first place remains elusive. In this paper, we present a rigorous theoretical study on the coverage of uncertainty estimation algorithms in learning quantiles. We prove that quantile regression suffers from an inherent under-coverage bias, in a vanilla setting where we learn a realizable linear quantile function and there is more data than parameters. More quantitatively, for α>0.5 and small d/n, the α-quantile learned by quantile regression roughly achieves coverage α - (α-1/2)· d/n regardless of the noise distribution, where d is the input dimension and n is the number of training data. Our theory reveals that this under-coverage bias stems from a certain high-dimensional parameter estimation error that is not implied by existing theories on quantile regression. Experiments on simulated and real data verify our theory and further illustrate the effect of various factors such as sample size and model capacity on the under-coverage bias in more practical setups.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 78 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Jun 2021.
Builds on
26 of 78 references.
References · 26
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,860
- 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,416
- 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,888
- 2017What Uncertainties Do We Need in Bayesian Deep Learning for Computer Vision?cited by 2,335
- 2019Can You Trust Your Model's Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shiftcited by 1,274
- 2016Distribution-Free Predictive Inference For Regressioncited by 657
- 2019Conformalized Quantile Regressioncited by 620
- 2018Predictive Uncertainty Estimation via Prior Networkscited by 555
- 2019A Simple Baseline for Bayesian Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 555
- 2019Conformal Prediction Under Covariate Shiftcited by 511
- 2020Uncertainty Sets for Image Classifiers using Conformal Predictioncited by 365
- 2017Snapshot Ensembles: Train 1, get M for freecited by 349
14 more
- 2019Verified Uncertainty Calibrationcited by 307
- 2021Distribution-Free, Risk-Controlling Prediction Setscited by 278
- 2019Predictive inference with the jackknife+cited by 206
- 2019Ensemble Distribution Distillationcited by 158
- 2020Robust Validation: Confident Predictions Even When Distributions Shiftcited by 82
- 2018A modern maximum-likelihood theory for high-dimensional logistic regressioncited by 79
- 2020Distribution-free binary classification: prediction sets, confidence intervals and calibrationcited by 79
- 2020Moment Multicalibration for Uncertainty Estimationcited by 63
- 2019Adaptive, Distribution-Free Prediction Intervals for Deep Networkscited by 56
- 2018Evaluating Uncertainty Quantification in End-to-End Autonomous Driving Controlcited by 54
- 2018The phase transition for the existence of the maximum likelihood estimate in high-dimensional logistic regressioncited by 45
- 2021Don't Just Blame Over-parametrization for Over-confidence: Theoretical Analysis of Calibration in Binary Classificationcited by 39
- 2013A framework to characterize performance of LASSO algorithmscited by 38
- 2020Sample Complexity of Uniform Convergence for Multicalibrationcited by 24
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 2; 2023: 4; 2024: 3.
10 papers.
- 2022Efficient and Differentiable Conformal Prediction with General Function Classescited by 25
- 2023Beyond Confidence: Reliable Models Should Also Consider Atypicalitycited by 25
- 2022Theoretical characterization of uncertainty in high-dimensional linear classificationcited by 18
- 2023Calibrating Multimodal Learningcited by 17
- 2021Quantifying Epistemic Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 10
- 2023Efficient Uncertainty Quantification and Reduction for Over-Parameterized Neural Networkscited by 10
- 2023Extreme Risk Mitigation in Reinforcement Learning using Extreme Value Theorycited by 5
- 2024Analysis of Bootstrap and Subsampling in High-dimensional Regularized Regressioncited by 4
- 2024Building Conformal Prediction Intervals with Approximate Message Passingcited by 2
- 2024EX-DRL: Hedging Against Heavy Losses with EXtreme Distributional Reinforcement Learningcited by 0
- 2024Building Conformal Prediction Intervals with Approximate Message Passing21 Oct 2024
- 2024EX-DRL: Hedging Against Heavy Losses with EXtreme Distributional Reinforcement Learning22 Aug 2024
- 2024Analysis of Bootstrap and Subsampling in High-dimensional Regularized Regression21 Feb 2024
- 2023Extreme Risk Mitigation in Reinforcement Learning using Extreme Value Theory24 Aug 2023
- 2023Efficient Uncertainty Quantification and Reduction for Over-Parameterized Neural Networks9 Jun 2023
- 2023Calibrating Multimodal Learning2 Jun 2023
- 2023Beyond Confidence: Reliable Models Should Also Consider Atypicality29 May 2023
- 2022Efficient and Differentiable Conformal Prediction with General Function Classes22 Feb 2022
- 2022Theoretical characterization of uncertainty in high-dimensional linear classification7 Feb 2022
- 2021Quantifying Epistemic Uncertainty in Deep Learning23 Oct 2021