A Survey on Uncertainty Toolkits for Deep Learning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2205.01040v1
• Date: Mon, 2 May 2022 17:23:06 GMT
• Title: A Survey on Uncertainty Toolkits for Deep Learning
• Authors: Maximilian Pintz, Joachim Sicking, Maximilian Poretschkin, Maram Akila
• Abstract summary: We present the first survey on toolkits for uncertainty estimation in deep learning (DL) We investigate 11 toolkits with respect to modeling and evaluation capabilities. While the first two provide a large degree of flexibility and seamless integration into their respective framework, the last one has the larger methodological scope.
• Score: 3.113304966059062
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The success of deep learning (DL) fostered the creation of unifying frameworks such as tensorflow or pytorch as much as it was driven by their creation in return. Having common building blocks facilitates the exchange of, e.g., models or concepts and makes developments easier replicable. Nonetheless, robust and reliable evaluation and assessment of DL models has often proven challenging. This is at odds with their increasing safety relevance, which recently culminated in the field of "trustworthy ML". We believe that, among others, further unification of evaluation and safeguarding methodologies in terms of toolkits, i.e., small and specialized framework derivatives, might positively impact problems of trustworthiness as well as reproducibility. To this end, we present the first survey on toolkits for uncertainty estimation (UE) in DL, as UE forms a cornerstone in assessing model reliability. We investigate 11 toolkits with respect to modeling and evaluation capabilities, providing an in-depth comparison for the three most promising ones, namely Pyro, Tensorflow Probability, and Uncertainty Quantification 360. While the first two provide a large degree of flexibility and seamless integration into their respective framework, the last one has the larger methodological scope.

Related papers

• From Passive Metric to Active Signal: The Evolving Role of Uncertainty Quantification in Large Language Models [77.04403907729738]
  This survey charts the evolution of uncertainty from a passive diagnostic metric to an active control signal guiding real-time model behavior.<n>We demonstrate how uncertainty is leveraged as an active control signal across three frontiers.<n>This survey argues that mastering the new trend of uncertainty is essential for building the next generation of scalable, reliable, and trustworthy AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-22T06:21:31Z)
• Open-World Deepfake Attribution via Confidence-Aware Asymmetric Learning [78.92934995292113]
  We propose a Confidence-Aware Asymmetric Learning (CAL) framework, which balances confidence across known and novel forgery types.<n>CAL consistently outperforms previous methods, achieving new state-of-the-art performance on both known and novel forgery attribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-14T12:31:28Z)
• Red Teaming Large Reasoning Models [26.720095252284818]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have emerged as a powerful advancement in multi-step reasoning tasks.<n>LRMs introduce novel safety and reliability risks, such as CoT-hijacking and prompt-induced inefficiencies.<n>We propose RT-LRM, a unified benchmark designed to assess the trustworthiness of LRMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-29T09:45:03Z)
• HARMONY: Hidden Activation Representations and Model Output-Aware Uncertainty Estimation for Vision-Language Models [42.91752946934796]
  Uncertainty Estimation plays a central role in quantifying the reliability of model outputs.<n>Most existing probability-based UE approaches rely on output probability distributions aggregating token probabilities into a single uncertainty score.<n>We propose a novel UE framework, HARMONY, that jointly leverages fused multimodal information in model activations and the output distribution of the VLM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-25T05:45:18Z)
• FaithCoT-Bench: Benchmarking Instance-Level Faithfulness of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [62.452350134196934]
  FaithCoT-Bench is a unified benchmark for instance-level CoT unfaithfulness detection.<n>Our framework formulates unfaithfulness detection as a discriminative decision problem.<n>FaithCoT-Bench sets a solid basis for future research toward more interpretable and trustworthy reasoning in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-05T05:16:54Z)
• From Confidence to Collapse in LLM Factual Robustness [21.27503954808115]
  We introduce a principled approach to measure factual robustness from the perspective of the generation process.<n>The Factual Robustness Score (FRS) is a novel metric which quantifies the stability of a fact against perturbations in decoding conditions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-22T09:59:23Z)
• Unveiling Trust in Multimodal Large Language Models: Evaluation, Analysis, and Mitigation [51.19622266249408]
  MultiTrust-X is a benchmark for evaluating, analyzing, and mitigating the trustworthiness issues of MLLMs.<n>Based on the taxonomy, MultiTrust-X includes 32 tasks and 28 curated datasets.<n>Our experiments reveal significant vulnerabilities in current models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-21T09:00:01Z)
• A Context-Aware Dual-Metric Framework for Confidence Estimation in Large Language Models [6.62851757612838]
  Current confidence estimation methods for large language models (LLMs) neglect the relevance between responses and contextual information.<n>We propose CRUX, which integrates context faithfulness and consistency for confidence estimation via two novel metrics.<n> Experiments across three benchmark datasets demonstrate CRUX's effectiveness, achieving the highest AUROC than existing baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T12:58:34Z)
• Trustworthy Reasoning: Evaluating and Enhancing Factual Accuracy in LLM Intermediate Thought Processes [16.451488374845407]
  We present a novel framework addressing a critical vulnerability in Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>This phenomenon poses substantial risks in high-stakes domains including healthcare, legal analysis, and scientific research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-25T10:34:51Z)
• Understanding and Benchmarking the Trustworthiness in Multimodal LLMs for Video Understanding [59.50808215134678]
  This study introduces Trust-videoLLMs, a first comprehensive benchmark evaluating 23 state-of-the-art videoLLMs.<n>Results reveal significant limitations in dynamic scene comprehension, cross-modal resilience and real-world risk mitigation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-14T04:04:54Z)
• Enhancing LLM Reliability via Explicit Knowledge Boundary Modeling [48.15636223774418]
  Large language models (LLMs) frequently hallucinate due to misaligned self-awareness. Existing approaches mitigate hallucinations via uncertainty estimation or query rejection. We propose the Explicit Knowledge Boundary Modeling framework to integrate fast and slow reasoning systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-04T03:16:02Z)
• On the Trustworthiness of Generative Foundation Models: Guideline, Assessment, and Perspective [333.9220561243189]
  Generative Foundation Models (GenFMs) have emerged as transformative tools. Their widespread adoption raises critical concerns regarding trustworthiness across dimensions. This paper presents a comprehensive framework to address these challenges through three key contributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T06:20:36Z)
• A Critical Synthesis of Uncertainty Quantification and Foundation Models in Monocular Depth Estimation [13.062551984263031]
  Metric depth estimation, which involves predicting absolute distances, poses particular challenges. We fuse five different uncertainty quantification methods with the current state-of-the-art DepthAnythingV2 foundation model. Our findings identify fine-tuning with the Gaussian Negative Log-Likelihood Loss (GNLL) as a particularly promising approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-14T15:13:00Z)
• On the Fairness, Diversity and Reliability of Text-to-Image Generative Models [68.62012304574012]
  multimodal generative models have sparked critical discussions on their reliability, fairness and potential for misuse.<n>We propose an evaluation framework to assess model reliability by analyzing responses to global and local perturbations in the embedding space.<n>Our method lays the groundwork for detecting unreliable, bias-injected models and tracing the provenance of embedded biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-21T09:46:55Z)
• Rethinking the Uncertainty: A Critical Review and Analysis in the Era of Large Language Models [42.563558441750224]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become fundamental to a broad spectrum of artificial intelligence applications. Current methods often struggle to accurately identify, measure, and address the true uncertainty. This paper introduces a comprehensive framework specifically designed to identify and understand the types and sources of uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-26T15:07:15Z)
• UBench: Benchmarking Uncertainty in Large Language Models with Multiple Choice Questions [10.28688988951815]
  We introduce UBench, a new benchmark for evaluating the uncertainty of large language models (LLMs)<n>Unlike other benchmarks, UBench is based on confidence intervals. It encompasses 11,978 multiple-choice questions spanning knowledge, language, understanding, and reasoning capabilities.<n>Our analysis reveals several crucial insights: 1) Our confidence interval-based methods are highly effective for uncertainty quantification; 2) Regarding uncertainty, outstanding open-source models show competitive performance versus closed-source models; 3) CoT and RP prompts present potential ways to improve model reliability, while the influence of temperature changes follows no universal rule.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T16:50:38Z)
• Challenges and Considerations in the Evaluation of Bayesian Causal Discovery [49.0053848090947]
  Representing uncertainty in causal discovery is a crucial component for experimental design, and more broadly, for safe and reliable causal decision making. Unlike non-Bayesian causal discovery, which relies on a single estimated causal graph and model parameters for assessment, causal discovery presents challenges due to the nature of its quantity. No consensus on the most suitable metric for evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T12:45:23Z)
• Large Language Model Confidence Estimation via Black-Box Access [30.490207799344333]
  We propose a simple framework where, we engineer novel features and train a (interpretable) model to estimate the confidence. We empirically demonstrate that our framework is effective in estimating confidence of Flan-ul2,-13b and Mistral-7b on four benchmark Q&A tasks. Our interpretable approach provides insight into features that are predictive of confidence, leading to the interesting and useful discovery.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-01T02:08:44Z)
• Confidence Under the Hood: An Investigation into the Confidence-Probability Alignment in Large Language Models [14.5291643644017]
  We introduce the concept of Confidence-Probability Alignment. We probe the alignment between models' internal and expressed confidence. Among the models analyzed, OpenAI's GPT-4 showed the strongest confidence-probability alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-25T15:42:04Z)
• Towards Precise Observations of Neural Model Robustness in Classification [2.127049691404299]
  In deep learning applications, robustness measures the ability of neural models that handle slight changes in input data. Our approach contributes to a deeper understanding of model robustness in safety-critical applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-25T09:37:44Z)
• Improving the Reliability of Large Language Models by Leveraging Uncertainty-Aware In-Context Learning [76.98542249776257]
  Large-scale language models often face the challenge of "hallucination" We introduce an uncertainty-aware in-context learning framework to empower the model to enhance or reject its output in response to uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-07T12:06:53Z)
• Measuring and Modeling Uncertainty Degree for Monocular Depth Estimation [50.920911532133154]
  The intrinsic ill-posedness and ordinal-sensitive nature of monocular depth estimation (MDE) models pose major challenges to the estimation of uncertainty degree. We propose to model the uncertainty of MDE models from the perspective of the inherent probability distributions. By simply introducing additional training regularization terms, our model, with surprisingly simple formations and without requiring extra modules or multiple inferences, can provide uncertainty estimations with state-of-the-art reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-19T12:11:15Z)
• Calibrating Multimodal Learning [94.65232214643436]
  We propose a novel regularization technique, i.e., Calibrating Multimodal Learning (CML) regularization, to calibrate the predictive confidence of previous methods. This technique could be flexibly equipped by existing models and improve the performance in terms of confidence calibration, classification accuracy, and model robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-02T04:29:57Z)
• Toward Reliable Human Pose Forecasting with Uncertainty [51.628234388046195]
  We develop an open-source library for human pose forecasting, including multiple models, supporting several datasets. We devise two types of uncertainty in the problem to increase performance and convey better trust.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-13T17:56:08Z)
• Assessing the Reliability of Deep Learning Classifiers Through Robustness Evaluation and Operational Profiles [13.31639740011618]
  We present a model-agnostic reliability assessment method for Deep Learning (DL) classifiers. We partition the input space into small cells and then "assemble" their robustness (to the ground truth) according to the operational profile (OP) of a given application. Reliability estimates in terms of the probability of misclassification per input (pmi) can be derived together with confidence levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-02T16:10:46Z)
• Trust but Verify: Assigning Prediction Credibility by Counterfactual Constrained Learning [123.3472310767721]
  Prediction credibility measures are fundamental in statistics and machine learning. These measures should account for the wide variety of models used in practice. The framework developed in this work expresses the credibility as a risk-fit trade-off.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-24T19:52:38Z)

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.