All Models Are Miscalibrated, But Some Less So: Comparing Calibration with Conditional Mean Operators

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.11465v1
• Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 05:52:09 GMT
• Title: All Models Are Miscalibrated, But Some Less So: Comparing Calibration with Conditional Mean Operators
• Authors: Peter Moskvichev, Dino Sejdinovic,
• Abstract summary: We propose a kernel calibration error based on the Hilbert-Schmidt norm of the difference between conditional mean operators. Our experiments show that CKCE provides a more consistent ranking of models by their calibration error and is more robust against distribution shift.
• Score: 12.103487148356747
• License:
• Abstract: When working in a high-risk setting, having well calibrated probabilistic predictive models is a crucial requirement. However, estimators for calibration error are not always able to correctly distinguish which model is better calibrated. We propose the \emph{conditional kernel calibration error} (CKCE) which is based on the Hilbert-Schmidt norm of the difference between conditional mean operators. By working directly with the definition of strong calibration as the distance between conditional distributions, which we represent by their embeddings in reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces, the CKCE is less sensitive to the marginal distribution of predictive models. This makes it more effective for relative comparisons than previously proposed calibration metrics. Our experiments, using both synthetic and real data, show that CKCE provides a more consistent ranking of models by their calibration error and is more robust against distribution shift.

Related papers

• Optimizing Calibration by Gaining Aware of Prediction Correctness [30.619608580138802]
  Cross-Entropy (CE) loss is widely used for calibrator training, which enforces the model to increase confidence on the ground truth class. We propose a new post-hoc calibration objective derived from the aim of calibration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-19T17:25:43Z)
• Proximity-Informed Calibration for Deep Neural Networks [49.330703634912915]
  ProCal is a plug-and-play algorithm with a theoretical guarantee to adjust sample confidence based on proximity. We show that ProCal is effective in addressing proximity bias and improving calibration on balanced, long-tail, and distribution-shift settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-07T16:40:51Z)
• A Consistent and Differentiable Lp Canonical Calibration Error Estimator [21.67616079217758]
  Deep neural networks are poorly calibrated and tend to output overconfident predictions. We propose a low-bias, trainable calibration error estimator based on Dirichlet kernel density estimates. Our method has a natural choice of kernel, and can be used to generate consistent estimates of other quantities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-13T15:11:11Z)
• Better Uncertainty Calibration via Proper Scores for Classification and Beyond [15.981380319863527]
  We introduce the framework of proper calibration errors, which relates every calibration error to a proper score. This relationship can be used to reliably quantify the model calibration improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-15T12:46:08Z)
• T-Cal: An optimal test for the calibration of predictive models [49.11538724574202]
  We consider detecting mis-calibration of predictive models using a finite validation dataset as a hypothesis testing problem. detecting mis-calibration is only possible when the conditional probabilities of the classes are sufficiently smooth functions of the predictions. We propose T-Cal, a minimax test for calibration based on a de-biased plug-in estimator of the $ell$-Expected Error (ECE)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-03T16:58:54Z)
• Uncertainty Quantification and Deep Ensembles [79.4957965474334]
  We show that deep-ensembles do not necessarily lead to improved calibration properties. We show that standard ensembling methods, when used in conjunction with modern techniques such as mixup regularization, can lead to less calibrated models. This text examines the interplay between three of the most simple and commonly used approaches to leverage deep learning when data is scarce.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-17T07:32:24Z)
• Unsupervised Calibration under Covariate Shift [92.02278658443166]
  We introduce the problem of calibration under domain shift and propose an importance sampling based approach to address it. We evaluate and discuss the efficacy of our method on both real-world datasets and synthetic datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-29T21:50:07Z)
• Calibration of Neural Networks using Splines [51.42640515410253]
  Measuring calibration error amounts to comparing two empirical distributions. We introduce a binning-free calibration measure inspired by the classical Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) statistical test. Our method consistently outperforms existing methods on KS error as well as other commonly used calibration measures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-23T07:18:05Z)
• Calibration of Pre-trained Transformers [55.57083429195445]
  We focus on BERT and RoBERTa in this work, and analyze their calibration across three tasks: natural language inference, paraphrase detection, and commonsense reasoning. We show that: (1) when used out-of-the-box, pre-trained models are calibrated in-domain, and compared to baselines, their calibration error out-of-domain can be as much as 3.5x lower; (2) temperature scaling is effective at further reducing calibration error in-domain, and using label smoothing to deliberately increase empirical uncertainty helps calibrate posteriors out-of-domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-17T18:58:44Z)

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.