Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userCan You Trust Your Models Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shift
185
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Modern machine learning methods including deep learning have achieved great success in predictive accuracy for supervised learning tasks, but may still fall short in giving useful estimates of their predictive {em uncertainty}. Quantifying uncertainty is especially critical in real-world settings, which often involve input distributions that are shifted from the training distribution due to a variety of factors including sample bias and non-stationarity. In such settings, well calibrated uncertainty estimates convey information about when a models output should (or should not) be trusted. Many probabilistic deep learning methods, including Bayesian-and non-Bayesian methods, have been proposed in the literature for quantifying predictive uncertainty, but to our knowledge there has not previously been a rigorous large-scale empirical comparison of these methods under dataset shift. We present a large-scale benchmark of existing state-of-the-art methods on classification problems and investigate the effect of dataset shift on accuracy and calibration. We find that traditional post-hoc calibration does indeed fall short, as do several other previous methods. However, some methods that marginalize over models give surprisingly strong results across a broad spectrum of tasks.
rate research
Read More
In open-domain dialogues, predictive uncertainties are mainly evaluated in a domain shift setting to cope with out-of-distribution inputs. However, in real-world conversations, there could be more extensive distributional shifted inputs than the out-of-distribution. To evaluate this, we first propose two methods, Unknown Word (UW) and Insufficient Context (IC), enabling gradual distributional shifts by corruption on the dialogue dataset. We then investigate the effect of distributional shifts on accuracy and calibration. Our experiments show that the performance of existing uncertainty estimation methods consistently degrades with intensifying the shift. The results suggest that the proposed methods could be useful for evaluating the calibration of dialogue systems under distributional shifts.
Modern neural networks have proven to be powerful function approximators, providing state-of-the-art performance in a multitude of applications. They however fall short in their ability to quantify confidence in their predictions - this is crucial in high-stakes applications that involve critical decision-making. Bayesian neural networks (BNNs) aim at solving this problem by placing a prior distribution over the networks parameters, thereby inducing a posterior distribution that encapsulates predictive uncertainty. While existing variants of BNNs based on Monte Carlo dropout produce reliable (albeit approximate) uncertainty estimates over in-distribution data, they tend to exhibit over-confidence in predictions made on target data whose feature distribution differs from the training data, i.e., the covariate shift setup. In this paper, we develop an approximate Bayesian inference scheme based on posterior regularisation, wherein unlabelled target data are used as pseudo-labels of model confidence that are used to regularise the models loss on labelled source data. We show that this approach significantly improves the accuracy of uncertainty quantification on covariate-shifted data sets, with minimal modification to the underlying model architecture. We demonstrate the utility of our method in the context of transferring prognostic models of prostate cancer across globally diverse populations.
Trustworthy deployment of ML models requires a proper measure of uncertainty, especially in safety-critical applications. We focus on uncertainty quantification (UQ) for classification problems via two avenues -- prediction sets using conformal prediction and calibration of probabilistic predictors by post-hoc binning -- since these possess distribution-free guarantees for i.i.d. data. Two common ways of generalizing beyond the i.i.d. setting include handling covariate and label shift. Within the context of distribution-free UQ, the former has already received attention, but not the latter. It is known that label shift hurts prediction, and we first argue that it also hurts UQ, by showing degradation in coverage and calibration. Piggybacking on recent progress in addressing label shift (for better prediction), we examine the right way to achieve UQ by reweighting the aforementioned conformal and calibration procedures whenever some unlabeled data from the target distribution is available. We examine these techniques theoretically in a distribution-free framework and demonstrate their excellent practical performance.
Deep neural networks (NNs) are powerful black box predictors that have recently achieved impressive performance on a wide spectrum of tasks. Quantifying predictive uncertainty in NNs is a challenging and yet unsolved problem. Bayesian NNs, which learn a distribution over weights, are currently the state-of-the-art for estimating predictive uncertainty; however these require significant modifications to the training procedure and are computationally expensive compared to standard (non-Bayesian) NNs. We propose an alternative to Bayesian NNs that is simple to implement, readily parallelizable, requires very little hyperparameter tuning, and yields high quality predictive uncertainty estimates. Through a series of experiments on classification and regression benchmarks, we demonstrate that our method produces well-calibrated uncertainty estimates which are as good or better than approximate Bayesian NNs. To assess robustness to dataset shift, we evaluate the predictive uncertainty on test examples from known and unknown distributions, and show that our method is able to express higher uncertainty on out-of-distribution examples. We demonstrate the scalability of our method by evaluating predictive uncertainty estimates on ImageNet.
While uncertainty estimation is a well-studied topic in deep learning, most such work focuses on marginal uncertainty estimates, i.e. the predictive mean and variance at individual input locations. But it is often more useful to estimate predictive correlations between the function values at different input locations. In this paper, we consider the problem of benchmarking how accurately Bayesian models can estimate predictive correlations. We first consider a downstream task which depends on posterior predictive correlations: transductive active learning (TAL). We find that TAL makes better use of models uncertainty estimates than ordinary active learning, and recommend this as a benchmark for evaluating Bayesian models. Since TAL is too expensive and indirect to guide development of algorithms, we introduce two metrics which more directly evaluate the predictive correlations and which can be computed efficiently: meta-correlations (i.e. the correlations between the models correlation estimates and the true values), and cross-normalized likelihoods (XLL). We validate these metrics by demonstrating their consistency with TAL performance and obtain insights about the relative performance of current Bayesian neural net and Gaussian process models.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
