paper-with-me

홈 › Papers

Is the Volume of a Credal Set a Good Measure for Epistemic Uncertainty?

2023-06-16 · Yusuf Sale, Michele Caprio, Eyke Hüllermeier

Adequate uncertainty representation and quantification have become imperative in various scientific disciplines, especially in machine learning and artificial intelligence. As an alternative to representing uncertainty via one single probability measure, we consider credal sets (convex sets of probability measures). The geometric representation of credal sets as $d$-dimensional polytopes implies a geometric intuition about (epistemic) uncertainty. In this paper, we show that the volume of the geometric representation of a credal set is a meaningful measure of epistemic uncertainty in the case of binary classification, but less so for multi-class classification. Our theoretical findings highlight the crucial role of specifying and employing uncertainty measures in machine learning in an appropriate way, and for being aware of possible pitfalls.

📄 PDF Abstract BibTeX arXiv:2306.09586

Code (0)

등록된 구현이 없습니다.

Tasks

Binary ClassificationMulti-class Classification

Methods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론

AWARE We propose to theoretically and empirically examine the effect of incorporating weighting schemes into walk-aggregating GNNs. To this end, we propose a simple, interpretable, and…

Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반

Credal Two-Sample Tests of Epistemic Uncertainty

2024-10-16 · Siu Lun Chau, Antonin Schrab, Arthur Gretton, Dino Sejdinovic 외

We introduce credal two-sample testing, a new hypothesis testing framework for comparing credal sets -- convex sets of probability measures where each element captures aleatoric uncertainty and the set itself represents …

Two-sample testing

Quantification of Credal Uncertainty: A Distance-Based Approach

2026-03-28 · Xabier Gonzalez-Garcia, Siu Lun Chau, Julian Rodemann, Michele Caprio 외 arxiv

Credal sets, i.e., closed convex sets of probability measures, provide a natural framework to represent aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty in machine learning. Yet how to quantify these two types of uncertainty for a gi…

Credal Concept Bottleneck Models for Epistemic-Aleatoric Uncertainty Decomposition

2026-04-27 · Tanmoy Mukherjee, Thomas Bailleux, Pierre Marquis, Zied Bouraoui arxiv

Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs) predict through human-interpretable concepts, but they typically output point concept probabilities that conflate epistemic uncertainty (reducible model underspecification) with aleatoric…

Ensemble-based Uncertainty Quantification: Bayesian versus Credal Inference

2021-07-21 · Mohammad Hossein Shaker, Eyke Hüllermeier

The idea to distinguish and quantify two important types of uncertainty, often referred to as aleatoric and epistemic, has received increasing attention in machine learning research in the last couple of years. In this p…

Ensemble LearningUncertainty Quantification

Quantifying Epistemic Predictive Uncertainty in Conformal Prediction

2026-02-02 · Siu Lun Chau, Soroush H. Zargarbashi, Yusuf Sale, Michele Caprio arxiv

We study the problem of quantifying epistemic predictive uncertainty (EPU) -- that is, uncertainty faced at prediction time due to the existence of multiple plausible predictive models -- within the framework of conforma…

Active Learning