Not Just How Much, But Where: Decomposing Epistemic Uncertainty into Per-Class Contributions
In safety-critical classification, the cost of failure is often asymmetric, yet Bayesian deep learning summarises epistemic uncertainty with a single scalar, mutual information (MI), that cannot distinguish whether a model's ignorance involves a benign or safety-critical class. We decompose MI into a per-class vector $C_k(x)=σ_k^{2}/(2μ_k)$, with $μ_k{=}\mathbb{E}[p_k]$ and $σ_k^2{=}\mathrm{Var}[p_k]$ across posterior samples. The decomposition follows from a second-order Taylor expansion of the entropy; the $1/μ_k$ weighting corrects boundary suppression and makes $C_k$ comparable across rare and common classes. By construction $\sum_k C_k \approx \mathrm{MI}$, and a companion skewness diagnostic flags inputs where the approximation degrades. After characterising the axiomatic properties of $C_k$, we validate it on three tasks: (i) selective prediction for diabetic retinopathy, where critical-class $C_k$ reduces selective risk by 34.7\% over MI and 56.2\% over variance baselines; (ii) out-of-distribution detection on clinical and image benchmarks, where $\sum_k C_k$ achieves the highest AUROC and the per-class view exposes asymmetric shifts invisible to MI; and (iii) a controlled label-noise study in which $\sum_k C_k$ shows less sensitivity to injected aleatoric noise than MI under end-to-end Bayesian training, while both metrics degrade under transfer learning. Across all tasks, the quality of the posterior approximation shapes uncertainty at least as strongly as the choice of metric, suggesting that how uncertainty is propagated through the network matters as much as how it is measured.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Out-of-Distribution DetectionTransfer LearningSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Deep Ensembles for Epistemic Uncertainty: A Frequentist Perspective
Decomposing prediction uncertainty into aleatoric (irreducible) and epistemic (reducible) components is critical for the reliable deployment of machine learning systems. While the mutual information between the response …
Decomposing LLM-Judge Uncertainty to Target Expert Labels
An LLM judge evaluates outputs at scale. Experts should label only where it is least sure. Its natural escalation signal conflates two uncertainties: aleatoric, real disagreement in the expert pool, which labels cannot r…
Decomposing Uncertainty for Large Language Models through Input Clarification Ensembling
Uncertainty decomposition refers to the task of decomposing the total uncertainty of a predictive model into aleatoric (data) uncertainty, resulting from inherent randomness in the data-generating process, and epistemic …
Uncertainty QuantificationQuantification of Uncertainty with Adversarial Models
Quantifying uncertainty is important for actionable predictions in real-world applications. A crucial part of predictive uncertainty quantification is the estimation of epistemic uncertainty, which is defined as an integ…
UbiQTree: Uncertainty Quantification in XAI with Tree Ensembles
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques, such as SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), have become essential tools for interpreting complex ensemble tree-based models, especially in high-stakes domains such …