Uniform convergence of the smooth calibration error and its relationship with functional gradient
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Calibration is a critical requirement for reliable probabilistic prediction, especially in high-risk applications. However, the theoretical understanding of which learning algorithms can simultaneously achieve high accuracy and good calibration remains limited, and many existing studies provide empirical validation or a theoretical guarantee in restrictive settings. To address this issue, in this work, we focus on the smooth calibration error (CE) and provide a uniform convergence bound, showing that the smooth CE is bounded by the sum of the smooth CE over the training dataset and a generalization gap. We further prove that the functional gradient of the loss function can effectively control the training smooth CE. Based on this framework, we analyze three representative algorithms: gradient boosting trees, kernel boosting, and two-layer neural networks. For each, we derive conditions under which both classification and calibration performances are simultaneously guaranteed. Our results offer new theoretical insights and practical guidance for designing reliable probabilistic models with provable calibration guarantees.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 62 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 May 2025.
Builds on
31 of 62 references.
References · 31
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,860
- 2014Convex Optimization: Algorithms and Complexitycited by 569
- 2019Measuring Calibration in Deep Learningcited by 443
- 2021Revisiting the Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 387
- 2019Beyond temperature scaling: Obtaining well-calibrated multiclass probabilities with Dirichlet calibrationcited by 359
- 2020Uncertainty Quantification and Deep Ensemblescited by 138
- 2021Soft Calibration Objectives for Neural Networkscited by 89
- 2020Distribution-free binary classification: prediction sets, confidence intervals and calibrationcited by 79
- 2015Posterior calibration and exploratory analysis for natural language processing modelscited by 75
- 2022Better Uncertainty Calibration via Proper Scores for Classification and Beyondcited by 65
- 2019Non-Parametric Calibration for Classificationcited by 57
- 2022A Unifying Theory of Distance from Calibrationcited by 51
19 more
- 2021Distribution-free calibration guarantees for histogram binning without sample splittingcited by 44
- 2022Low-Degree Multicalibrationcited by 44
- 2022A Consistent and Differentiable Lp Canonical Calibration Error Estimatorcited by 44
- 2013Margins, Shrinkage, and Boostingcited by 35
- 2023When Does Optimizing a Proper Loss Yield Calibration?cited by 35
- 2023Multicalibration as Boosting for Regressioncited by 32
- 2022Metrics of calibration for probabilistic predictionscited by 31
- 2021Large Scale Prediction with Decision Treescited by 28
- 2017Early stopping for kernel boosting algorithms: A general analysis with localized complexitiescited by 27
- 2022T-Cal: An optimal test for the calibration of predictive modelscited by 24
- 2019Gradient Descent can Learn Less Over-parameterized Two-layer Neural Networks on Classification Problemscited by 23
- 2022Smooth Calibration, Leaky Forecasts, Finite Recall, and Nash Dynamicscited by 22
- 2023Calibration by Distribution Matching: Trainable Kernel Calibration Metricscited by 20
- 2023Loss Minimization Yields Multicalibration for Large Neural Networkscited by 19
- 2024When is Multicalibration Post-Processing Necessary?cited by 16
- 2018Functional Gradient Boosting based on Residual Network Perceptioncited by 14
- 2023Minimum-Risk Recalibration of Classifierscited by 10
- 2024Testing Calibration in Nearly-Linear Timecited by 9
- 2024Information-theoretic Generalization Analysis for Expected Calibration Errorcited by 9
Built on by
Not cited yet.