mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

ESD: Expected Squared Difference as a Tuning-Free Trainable Calibration Measure

arXiv 2303.02472 ↗First posted 4 Mar 2023cs.LG cs.AI cs.CLcited by 13

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Studies have shown that modern neural networks tend to be poorly calibrated due to over-confident predictions. Traditionally, post-processing methods have been used to calibrate the model after training. In recent years, various trainable calibration measures have been proposed to incorporate them directly into the training process. However, these methods all incorporate internal hyperparameters, and the performance of these calibration objectives relies on tuning these hyperparameters, incurring more computational costs as the size of neural networks and datasets become larger. As such, we present Expected Squared Difference (ESD), a tuning-free (i.e., hyperparameter-free) trainable calibration objective loss, where we view the calibration error from the perspective of the squared difference between the two expectations. With extensive experiments on several architectures (CNNs, Transformers) and datasets, we demonstrate that (1) incorporating ESD into the training improves model calibration in various batch size settings without the need for internal hyperparameter tuning, (2) ESD yields the best-calibrated results compared with previous approaches, and (3) ESD drastically improves the computational costs required for calibration during training due to the absence of internal hyperparameter. The code is publicly accessible at https://github.com/hee-suk-yoon/ESD.

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Mar 2023.

Builds on

17 of 36 references.

References · 17

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  3. 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,860
  4. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,416
  5. 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,888
  6. 2019Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbationscited by 2,857
  7. 2015A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inferencecited by 1,837
  8. 2019Can You Trust Your Model's Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shiftcited by 1,274
  9. 2016End to End Learning for Self-Driving Carscited by 1,000
  10. 2019Adversarial NLI: A New Benchmark for Natural Language Understandingcited by 798
  11. 2016Distribution-Free Predictive Inference For Regressioncited by 657
  12. 2020Calibrating Deep Neural Networks using Focal Losscited by 353
5 more
  1. 2020Improving model calibration with accuracy versus uncertainty optimizationcited by 123
  2. 2020Calibration of Neural Networks using Splinescited by 97
  3. 2021Soft Calibration Objectives for Neural Networkscited by 89
  4. 2022LAD: A Hybrid Deep Learning System for Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo Disorders Diagnosticcited by 8
  5. 2020Local Interpretability of Calibrated Prediction Models: A Case of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Screening Testcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 6; 2025: 4; 2026: 2.

13 papers.

Sort:

By area: