mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Conformal Risk Control under Non-Monotone Losses: Theory and Finite-Sample Guarantees

arXiv 2604.01502 ↗First posted 2 Apr 2026stat.ML cs.LGcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Conformal risk control (CRC) provides distribution-free guarantees for controlling the expected loss at a user-specified level. Existing theory typically assumes that the loss decreases monotonically with a tuning parameter that governs the size of the prediction set. However, this assumption is often violated in practice, where losses may behave non-monotonically due to competing objectives such as coverage and efficiency. In this paper, we study CRC under non-monotone loss functions when the tuning parameter is selected from a finite grid, a setting commonly arising in thresholding and discretized decision rules. Revisiting a known counterexample, we show that the validity of CRC without monotonicity depends critically on the relationship between the calibration sample size and the grid resolution. In particular, reliable risk control can still be achieved when the calibration sample is sufficiently large relative to the grid size. We establish a finite-sample guarantee for bounded losses over a grid of size m, showing that the excess risk above the target level α scales on the order of √log(m)/n, where n is the calibration sample size. A matching lower bound demonstrates that this rate is minimax optimal. We also derive refined guarantees under additional structural conditions, including Lipschitz continuity and monotonicity, and extend the analysis to settings with distribution shift via importance weighting. Numerical experiments on synthetic multilabel classification and real object detection data illustrate the practical implications of non-monotonicity. Methods that explicitly account for finite-sample uncertainty achieve more stable risk control than approaches based on monotonicity transformations, while maintaining competitive prediction set sizes.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Apr 2026.

Builds on

18 of 31 references.

References · 18

  1. 2021A Gentle Introduction to Conformal Prediction and Distribution-Free Uncertainty Quantificationcited by 777
  2. 2016Distribution-Free Predictive Inference For Regressioncited by 657
  3. 2019Conformal Prediction Under Covariate Shiftcited by 511
  4. 2022Conformal prediction beyond exchangeabilitycited by 348
  5. 2022Conformal Risk Controlcited by 290
  6. 2021Distribution-Free, Risk-Controlling Prediction Setscited by 278
  7. 2021Learn then Test: Calibrating Predictive Algorithms to Achieve Risk Controlcited by 256
  8. 2023Conformal Prediction With Conditional Guaranteescited by 146
  9. 2022Image-to-Image Regression with Distribution-Free Uncertainty Quantification and Applications in Imagingcited by 107
  10. 2021Distribution-free uncertainty quantification for classification under label shiftcited by 99
  11. 2024Theoretical Foundations of Conformal Predictioncited by 96
  12. 2021Consistent Accelerated Inference via Confident Adaptive Transformerscited by 73
6 more
  1. 2023How to Trust Your Diffusion Model: A Convex Optimization Approach to Conformal Risk Controlcited by 50
  2. 2022Achieving Risk Control in Online Learning Settingscited by 38
  3. 2023Non-Exchangeable Conformal Risk Controlcited by 29
  4. 2022Conformal Prediction Sets with Limited False Positivescited by 28
  5. 2024Cross-Validation Conformal Risk Controlcited by 8
  6. 2026Conformal Risk Control for Non-Monotonic Lossescited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.