mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

GeoConformal prediction: a model-agnostic framework of measuring the uncertainty of spatial prediction

arXiv 2412.08661 ↗First posted 5 Dec 2024stat.ML cs.LG physics.data-ancited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Spatial prediction is a fundamental task in geography. In recent years, with advances in geospatial artificial intelligence (GeoAI), numerous models have been developed to improve the accuracy of geographic variable predictions. Beyond achieving higher accuracy, it is equally important to obtain predictions with uncertainty measures to enhance model credibility and support responsible spatial prediction. Although geostatistic methods like Kriging offer some level of uncertainty assessment, such as Kriging variance, these measurements are not always accurate and lack general applicability to other spatial models. To address this issue, we propose a model-agnostic uncertainty assessment method called GeoConformal Prediction, which incorporates geographical weighting into conformal prediction. We applied it to two classic spatial prediction cases, spatial regression and spatial interpolation, to evaluate its reliability. First, in the spatial regression case, we used XGBoost to predict housing prices, followed by GeoConformal to calculate uncertainty. Our results show that GeoConformal achieved a coverage rate of 93.67%, while Bootstrap methods only reached a maximum coverage of 81.00% after 2000 runs. Next, we applied GeoConformal to spatial interpolation models. We found that the uncertainty obtained from GeoConformal aligned closely with the variance in Kriging. Finally, using GeoConformal, we analyzed the sources of uncertainty in spatial prediction. We found that explicitly including local features in AI models can significantly reduce prediction uncertainty, especially in areas with strong local dependence. Our findings suggest that GeoConformal holds potential not only for geographic knowledge discovery but also for guiding the design of future GeoAI models, paving the way for more reliable and interpretable spatial prediction frameworks.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 62 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Dec 2024.

Builds on

14 of 62 references.

References · 14

  1. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,448
  2. 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,926
  3. 2021A Gentle Introduction to Conformal Prediction and Distribution-Free Uncertainty Quantificationcited by 792
  4. 2016Distribution-Free Predictive Inference For Regressioncited by 668
  5. 2019Conformal Prediction Under Covariate Shiftcited by 519
  6. 2022Adaptive Conformal Predictions for Time Seriescited by 161
  7. 2024Spatial-Temporal Large Language Model for Traffic Predictioncited by 83
  8. 2021Cross-validation: what does it estimate and how well does it do it?cited by 65
  9. 2024TorchSpatial: A Location Encoding Framework and Benchmark for Spatial Representation Learningcited by 31
  10. 2022Split Localized Conformal Predictioncited by 23
  11. 2020Unlabelled Data Improves Bayesian Uncertainty Calibration under Covariate Shiftcited by 21
  12. 2020Valid model-free spatial predictioncited by 19
2 more
  1. 2024Group-Weighted Conformal Predictioncited by 14
  2. 2024Quantifying Distribution Shifts and Uncertainties for Enhanced Model Robustness in Machine Learning Applicationscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

2 papers.