Evaluation of survival distribution predictions with discrimination measures

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2112.04828v1
• Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2021 10:52:36 GMT
• Title: Evaluation of survival distribution predictions with discrimination measures
• Authors: Raphael Sonabend, Andreas Bender, Sebastian Vollmer
• Abstract summary: We consider how to evaluate survival distribution predictions with measures of discrimination. We find that the method for doing so is rarely described in the literature and often leads to unfair comparisons. We recommend that machine learning survival analysis software implements clear transformations between distribution and risk predictions.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In this paper we consider how to evaluate survival distribution predictions with measures of discrimination. This is a non-trivial problem as discrimination measures are the most commonly used in survival analysis and yet there is no clear method to derive a risk prediction from a distribution prediction. We survey methods proposed in literature and software and consider their respective advantages and disadvantages. Whilst distributions are frequently evaluated by discrimination measures, we find that the method for doing so is rarely described in the literature and often leads to unfair comparisons. We find that the most robust method of reducing a distribution to a risk is to sum over the predicted cumulative hazard. We recommend that machine learning survival analysis software implements clear transformations between distribution and risk predictions in order to allow more transparent and accessible model evaluation.

Related papers

• Toward Conditional Distribution Calibration in Survival Prediction [6.868842871753991]
  We propose a method based on conformal prediction that uses the model's predicted individual survival probability at that instance's observed time. We provide theoretical guarantees for both marginal and conditional calibration and test it extensively across 15 diverse real-world datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-27T20:19:46Z)
• Predictive Uncertainty Quantification via Risk Decompositions for Strictly Proper Scoring Rules [7.0549244915538765]
  Uncertainty in predictive modeling often relies on ad hoc methods. This paper introduces a theoretical approach to understanding uncertainty through statistical risks. We show how to split pointwise risk into Bayes risk and excess risk.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-16T14:40:22Z)
• Is Epistemic Uncertainty Faithfully Represented by Evidential Deep Learning Methods? [26.344949402398917]
  This paper presents novel theoretical insights of evidential deep learning. It highlights the difficulties in optimizing second-order loss functions. It provides novel insights into issues of identifiability and convergence in second-order loss minimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-14T10:07:05Z)
• Flexible Group Fairness Metrics for Survival Analysis [0.0]
  We explore how to utilise existing survival metrics to measure bias with group fairness metrics. We find that measures of discrimination are able to capture bias well whereas there is less clarity with measures of calibration and scoring rules.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-26T20:55:55Z)
• Personalized Trajectory Prediction via Distribution Discrimination [78.69458579657189]
  Trarimiy prediction is confronted with the dilemma to capture the multi-modal nature of future dynamics. We present a distribution discrimination (DisDis) method to predict personalized motion patterns. Our method can be integrated with existing multi-modal predictive models as a plug-and-play module.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-29T17:42:12Z)
• DEUP: Direct Epistemic Uncertainty Prediction [56.087230230128185]
  Epistemic uncertainty is part of out-of-sample prediction error due to the lack of knowledge of the learner. We propose a principled approach for directly estimating epistemic uncertainty by learning to predict generalization error and subtracting an estimate of aleatoric uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-16T23:50:35Z)
• When Does Uncertainty Matter?: Understanding the Impact of Predictive Uncertainty in ML Assisted Decision Making [68.19284302320146]
  We carry out user studies to assess how people with differing levels of expertise respond to different types of predictive uncertainty. We found that showing posterior predictive distributions led to smaller disagreements with the ML model's predictions. This suggests that posterior predictive distributions can potentially serve as useful decision aids which should be used with caution and take into account the type of distribution and the expertise of the human.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-12T02:23:53Z)
• A One-step Approach to Covariate Shift Adaptation [82.01909503235385]
  A default assumption in many machine learning scenarios is that the training and test samples are drawn from the same probability distribution. We propose a novel one-step approach that jointly learns the predictive model and the associated weights in one optimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-08T11:35:47Z)
• Uncertainty Estimation in Cancer Survival Prediction [8.827764645115955]
  Survival models are used in various fields, such as the development of cancer treatment protocols. We propose a Bayesian framework for survival models that not only gives more accurate survival predictions but also quantifies the survival uncertainty better. Our approach is a novel combination of variational inference for uncertainty estimation, neural multi-task logistic regression for estimating nonlinear and time-varying risk models, and an additional sparsity-inducing prior to work with high dimensional data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-19T05:08:01Z)
• Survival Cluster Analysis [93.50540270973927]
  There is an unmet need in survival analysis for identifying subpopulations with distinct risk profiles. An approach that addresses this need is likely to improve characterization of individual outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-29T22:41:21Z)
• Learning to Predict Error for MRI Reconstruction [67.76632988696943]
  We demonstrate that predictive uncertainty estimated by the current methods does not highly correlate with prediction error. We propose a novel method that estimates the target labels and magnitude of the prediction error in two steps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-13T15:55:32Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.