A calibration test for evaluating set-based epistemic uncertainty representations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The accurate representation of epistemic uncertainty is a challenging yet essential task in machine learning. A widely used representation corresponds to convex sets of probabilistic predictors, also known as credal sets. One popular way of constructing these credal sets is via ensembling or specialized supervised learning methods, where the epistemic uncertainty can be quantified through measures such as the set size or the disagreement among members. In principle, these sets should contain the true data-generating distribution. As a necessary condition for this validity, we adopt the strongest notion of calibration as a proxy. Concretely, we propose a novel statistical test to determine whether there is a convex combination of the set's predictions that is calibrated in distribution. In contrast to previous methods, our framework allows the convex combination to be instance dependent, recognizing that different ensemble members may be better calibrated in different regions of the input space. Moreover, we learn this combination via proper scoring rules, which inherently optimize for calibration. Building on differentiable, kernel-based estimators of calibration errors, we introduce a nonparametric testing procedure and demonstrate the benefits of capturing instance-level variability on of synthetic and real-world experiments.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 59 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Feb 2025.
Builds on
29 of 59 references.
References · 29
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
- 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,364
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
- 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,448
- 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,926
- 2017What Uncertainties Do We Need in Bayesian Deep Learning for Computer Vision?cited by 2,352
- 2019Can You Trust Your Model's Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shiftcited by 1,287
- 2019Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty in Machine Learning: An Introduction to Concepts and Methodscited by 913
- 2019Evaluating model calibration in classificationcited by 168
- 2020Calibration of Neural Networks using Splinescited by 97
- 2019Calibration tests in multi-class classification: A unifying frameworkcited by 79
- 2021Prior and Posterior Networks: A Survey on Evidential Deep Learning Methods For Uncertainty Estimationcited by 71
17 more
- 2022Pitfalls of Epistemic Uncertainty Quantification through Loss Minimisationcited by 66
- 2020Intra Order-preserving Functions for Calibration of Multi-Class Neural Networkscited by 65
- 2022Better Uncertainty Calibration via Proper Scores for Classification and Beyondcited by 65
- 2022Deep Ensembles Work, But Are They Necessary?cited by 63
- 2022A Consistent and Differentiable Lp Canonical Calibration Error Estimatorcited by 47
- 2023Credal Bayesian Deep Learningcited by 45
- 2022The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Evidential Regressioncited by 40
- 2023Is the Volume of a Credal Set a Good Measure for Epistemic Uncertainty?cited by 40
- 2020Evaluating Robustness of Predictive Uncertainty Estimation: Are Dirichlet-based Models Reliable?cited by 39
- 2023On Second-Order Scoring Rules for Epistemic Uncertainty Quantificationcited by 38
- 2024Is Epistemic Uncertainty Faithfully Represented by Evidential Deep Learning Methods?cited by 35
- 2024CreINNs: Credal-Set Interval Neural Networks for Uncertainty Estimation in Classification Taskscited by 26
- 2021Local Calibration: Metrics and Recalibrationcited by 24
- 2024Conformalized Credal Set Predictorscited by 21
- 2023Calibration by Distribution Matching: Trainable Kernel Calibration Metricscited by 20
- 2023Consistent and Asymptotically Unbiased Estimation of Proper Calibration Errorscited by 11
- 2022On the Calibration of Probabilistic Classifier Setscited by 8
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 5.
7 papers.
- 2025Integral Imprecise Probability Metricscited by 11
- 2026Beyond Prediction-Set Size: Quantifying Conformal Uncertainty through Credal Geometrycited by 4
- 2025When Do Credal Sets Stabilize? Fixed-Point Theorems for Credal Set Updatescited by 1
- 2026Efficient Credal Prediction through Decalibrationcited by 1
- 2026Incentive Aware AI Regulations: A Credal Characterisationcited by 0
- 2026Calibrated Preference Learning: The Case of Label Rankingcited by 0
- 2026Can we trust our models? Epistemic calibration in second-order classificationcited by 0
- 2026Can we trust our models? Epistemic calibration in second-order classification9 Jun 2026
- 2026Calibrated Preference Learning: The Case of Label Ranking28 May 2026
- 2026Efficient Credal Prediction through Decalibration9 Mar 2026
- 2026Incentive Aware AI Regulations: A Credal Characterisation5 Mar 2026
- 2026Beyond Prediction-Set Size: Quantifying Conformal Uncertainty through Credal Geometry2 Feb 2026
- 2025When Do Credal Sets Stabilize? Fixed-Point Theorems for Credal Set Updates6 Oct 2025
- 2025Integral Imprecise Probability Metrics22 May 2025