# DSDE: Using Proportion Estimation to Improve Model Selection for Out-of-Distribution Detection

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.01487 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.01487/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 22 of its 36 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 3 Nov 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 22 of 22)

- [Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1512.03385/) (2015)
- [Densely Connected Convolutional Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1608.06993/) (2016)
- [Wide Residual Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1605.07146/) (2016)
- [Supervised Contrastive Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.11362/) (2020)
- [Aggregated Residual Transformations for Deep Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1611.05431/) (2016)
- [A Baseline for Detecting Misclassified and Out-of-Distribution Examples in Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02136/) (2016)
- [Describing Textures in the Wild](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1311.3618/) (2013)
- [Identity Mappings in Deep Residual Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1603.05027/) (2016)
- [LSUN: Construction of a Large-scale Image Dataset using Deep Learning with Humans in the Loop](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1506.03365/) (2015)
- [Enhancing The Reliability of Out-of-distribution Image Detection in Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.02690/) (2017)
- [Energy-based Out-of-distribution Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.03759/) (2020)
- [Generalized Out-of-Distribution Detection: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.11334/) (2021)
- [Deep Neural Networks are Easily Fooled: High Confidence Predictions for Unrecognizable Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1412.1897/) (2014)
- [Out-of-Distribution Detection with Deep Nearest Neighbors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.06507/) (2022)
- [Why ReLU networks yield high-confidence predictions far away from the training data and how to mitigate the problem](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.05720/) (2018)
- [A Unified Survey on Anomaly, Novelty, Open-Set, and Out-of-Distribution Detection: Solutions and Future Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14051/) (2021)
- [Density of States Estimation for Out-of-Distribution Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.09273/) (2020)
- [A statistical framework for efficient out of distribution detection in deep neural networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.12967/) (2021)
- [Model-agnostic out-of-distribution detection using combined statistical tests](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.01097/) (2022)
- [Boosting Out-of-Distribution Detection with Multiple Pre-trained Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.12720/) (2022)
- [Multiple Testing Framework for Out-of-Distribution Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.09522/) (2022)
- [A Change-Point Approach to Estimating the Proportion of False Null Hypotheses in Multiple Testing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.10017/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Model library is an effective tool for improving the performance of single-model Out-of-Distribution (OoD) detector, mainly through model selection and detector fusion. However, existing methods in the literature do not provide uncertainty quantification for model selection results. Additionally, the model ensemble process primarily focuses on controlling the True Positive Rate (TPR) while neglecting the False Positive Rate (FPR). In this paper, we emphasize the significance of the proportion of models in the library that identify the test sample as an OoD sample. This proportion holds crucial information and directly influences the error rate of OoD detection.To address this, we propose inverting the commonly-used sequential p-value strategies. We define the rejection region initially and then estimate the error rate. Furthermore, we introduce a novel perspective from change-point detection and propose an approach for proportion estimation with automatic hyperparameter selection. We name the proposed approach as DOS-Storey-based Detector Ensemble (DSDE). Experimental results on CIFAR10 and CIFAR100 demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach in tackling OoD detection challenges. Specifically, the CIFAR10 experiments show that DSDE reduces the FPR from 11.07% to 3.31% compared to the top-performing single-model detector.