Diagnosing Conformal Prediction Failures Under Distribution Shift: A COVID-19 Case Study
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Conformal prediction provides distribution-free coverage guarantees, but these degrade under distribution shift - and practitioners lack tools to anticipate which deployed models will fail before observing test data. We propose SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) concentration - the fraction of feature importance concentrated in the top feature - as a pre-deployment diagnostic for conformal prediction vulnerability in gradient-boosted classifiers. Using COVID-19 as a naturalistic case study, eight supply chain tasks experience identical temporal shift yet coverage drops ranging from negligible to catastrophic. Feature-importance concentration is strongly associated with failure severity across 16 multiclass tasks in 9 domains, while standard distributional shift detectors detect shift uniformly across tasks but cannot distinguish catastrophic from robust outcomes. External validation across 9 non-supply-chain datasets shows partial transfer. We prove a formal theorem showing that Adaptive Prediction Sets conformity-score bounds worsen monotonically with concentration under explicit assumptions, verified empirically. The diagnostic identifies concentrated-dependence failures characteristic of gradient-boosted models but does not detect global-sensitivity failures observed in neural networks. A decision framework operationalizes the diagnostic as an exploratory pre-deployment rule with an uncertainty band around a concentration threshold.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 27 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Jan 2026.
Builds on
27 of 38 references.
References · 27
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
- 2020WILDS: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shiftscited by 1,375
- 2020In Search of Lost Domain Generalizationcited by 1,054
- 2021A Gentle Introduction to Conformal Prediction and Distribution-Free Uncertainty Quantificationcited by 792
- 2016Distribution-Free Predictive Inference For Regressioncited by 668
- 2019Conformalized Quantile Regressioncited by 629
- 2019Conformal Prediction Under Covariate Shiftcited by 519
- 2020Classification with Valid and Adaptive Coveragecited by 396
- 2021Adaptive Conformal Inference Under Distribution Shiftcited by 375
- 2020Uncertainty Sets for Image Classifiers using Conformal Predictioncited by 366
- 2022Conformal prediction beyond exchangeabilitycited by 355
- 2022Conformal Risk Controlcited by 299
15 more
- 2018Consistent Individualized Feature Attribution for Tree Ensemblescited by 285
- 2016Revisiting Classifier Two-Sample Testscited by 268
- 2021Accuracy on the Line: On the Strong Correlation Between Out-of-Distribution and In-Distribution Generalizationcited by 249
- 2022Adaptive Conformal Predictions for Time Seriescited by 161
- 2023Conformal Prediction With Conditional Guaranteescited by 152
- 2022Leveraging Unlabeled Data to Predict Out-of-Distribution Performancecited by 145
- 2022Conformal Inference for Online Prediction with Arbitrary Distribution Shiftscited by 128
- 2023Class-Conditional Conformal Prediction with Many Classescited by 109
- 2021Distribution-free uncertainty quantification for classification under label shiftcited by 101
- 2021Shifts: A Dataset of Real Distributional Shift Across Multiple Large-Scale Taskscited by 101
- 2024RelBench: A Benchmark for Deep Learning on Relational Databasescited by 96
- 2023Improved Online Conformal Prediction via Strongly Adaptive Online Learningcited by 78
- 2022Achieving Risk Control in Online Learning Settingscited by 39
- 2023Empirically Validating Conformal Prediction on Modern Vision Architectures Under Distribution Shift and Long-tailed Datacited by 8
- 2024Adapting Prediction Sets to Distribution Shifts Without Labelscited by 6
Built on by
Not cited yet.