mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Decodable but Not Accessible: Auditing Distance-Based Reliability Estimation on Disentangled Skin-Lesion Representations

arXiv 2608.11267 ↗First posted 10 Aug 2026eess.IV cs.CVcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Distance-based reliability estimation assumes that a representation's geometry reflects its trustworthiness, yet this assumption is rarely tested under training interventions that reshape geometry directly. We audit this assumption under domain-adversarial representation learning using a disentanglement dose-response ladder. Three checkpoint families share the same architecture and a 16-dimensional representation, differing only in orthogonality strength (lambda = 0, 1, 5). Representation geometry changed substantially with disentanglement strength: the condition number shifted by two orders of magnitude (Kendall tau = 0.84, exact p = 2.8e-5). This change was not accompanied by improved reliability estimation: Mahalanobis-distance AUROC (ISIC-test vs. PAD-UFES) remained flat and below chance (about 0.40) at every level, with no significant association with any of five geometry metrics tested. The same failure was observed for cosine-to-centroid and pooled k-nearest-neighbor scorers, plus three non-distance-based scorers: an energy-based confidence score, Virtual-Logit Matching, and a kernel density estimator. Seven of eight scorers converged on the same result; the energy-based score showed an isolated upward trend that we report but do not treat as evidence against the overall pattern. A supervised probe with no access to the training objective recovered domain membership from the identical embeddings at 0.72-0.81 AUROC across every level, showing that the relevant information was not absent from the representation. These findings indicate that classification performance alone can overlook whether information in a learned representation is organized in a form that downstream reliability estimators can use. Information can remain decodable while becoming largely inaccessible to non-probing reliability estimators.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 10 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Aug 2026.

Builds on

9 of 10 references.

References · 9

  1. 2020Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 1,928
  2. 2014Unsupervised Domain Adaptation by Backpropagationcited by 1,906
  3. 2018A Simple Unified Framework for Detecting Out-of-Distribution Samples and Adversarial Attackscited by 1,472
  4. 2020Energy-based Out-of-distribution Detectioncited by 1,296
  5. 2019Skin Lesion Analysis Toward Melanoma Detection 2018: A Challenge Hosted by the International Skin Imaging Collaboration (ISIC)cited by 657
  6. 2019Designing and Interpreting Probes with Control Taskscited by 608
  7. 2022Out-of-Distribution Detection with Deep Nearest Neighborscited by 596
  8. 2022ViM: Out-Of-Distribution with Virtual-logit Matchingcited by 404
  9. 2020PAD-UFES-20: a skin lesion dataset composed of patient data and clinical images collected from smartphonescited by 116

Built on by

Not cited yet.