mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Hidden Heterogeneity: When to Choose Similarity-Based Calibration

arXiv 2202.01840 ↗First posted 3 Feb 2022cs.LGcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Trustworthy classifiers are essential to the adoption of machine learning predictions in many real-world settings. The predicted probability of possible outcomes can inform high-stakes decision making, particularly when assessing the expected value of alternative decisions or the risk of bad outcomes. These decisions require well-calibrated probabilities, not just the correct prediction of the most likely class. Black-box classifier calibration methods can improve the reliability of a classifier's output without requiring retraining. However, these methods are unable to detect subpopulations where calibration could also improve prediction accuracy. Such subpopulations are said to exhibit "hidden heterogeneity" (HH), because the original classifier did not detect them. This paper proposes a quantitative measure for HH. It also introduces two similarity-weighted calibration methods that can address HH by adapting locally to each test item: SWC weights the calibration set by similarity to the test item, and SWC-HH explicitly incorporates hidden heterogeneity to filter the calibration set. Experiments show that the improvements in calibration achieved by similarity-based calibration methods correlate with the amount of HH present and, given sufficient calibration data, generally exceed calibration achieved by global methods. HH can therefore serve as a useful diagnostic tool for identifying when local calibration methods would be beneficial.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 49 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Feb 2022.

Builds on

20 of 49 references.

References · 20

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,860
  3. 2017Fashion-MNIST: a Novel Image Dataset for Benchmarking Machine Learning Algorithmscited by 4,283
  4. 2019Can You Trust Your Model's Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shiftcited by 1,274
  5. 2021RepVGG: Making VGG-style ConvNets Great Againcited by 520
  6. 2019Measuring Calibration in Deep Learningcited by 443
  7. 2021Revisiting the Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 387
  8. 2019Beyond temperature scaling: Obtaining well-calibrated multiclass probabilities with Dirichlet calibrationcited by 359
  9. 2020Calibrating Deep Neural Networks using Focal Losscited by 353
  10. 2019Verified Uncertainty Calibrationcited by 307
  11. 2020Mix-n-Match: Ensemble and Compositional Methods for Uncertainty Calibration in Deep Learningcited by 190
  12. 2019Evaluating model calibration in classificationcited by 165
8 more
  1. 2019Calibration tests in multi-class classification: A unifying frameworkcited by 79
  2. 2020Individual Calibration with Randomized Forecastingcited by 50
  3. 2020An Empirical Analysis of Backward Compatibility in Machine Learning Systemscited by 38
  4. 2020Towards Trustworthy Predictions from Deep Neural Networks with Fast Adversarial Calibrationcited by 34
  5. 2020Multi-Class Uncertainty Calibration via Mutual Information Maximization-based Binningcited by 27
  6. 2021Confidence Calibration for Domain Generalization under Covariate Shiftcited by 27
  7. 2018Learning for Single-Shot Confidence Calibration in Deep Neural Networks through Stochastic Inferencescited by 25
  8. 2021Learning to Cascade: Confidence Calibration for Improving the Accuracy and Computational Cost of Cascade Inference Systemscited by 14

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1.

1 paper.