On the Interconnections of Calibration, Quantification, and Classifier Accuracy Prediction under Dataset Shift

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.11380v1
• Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 15:42:55 GMT
• Title: On the Interconnections of Calibration, Quantification, and Classifier Accuracy Prediction under Dataset Shift
• Authors: Alejandro Moreo,
• Abstract summary: This paper investigates the interconnections among three fundamental problems, calibration, and quantification, under dataset shift conditions.<n>We show that access to an oracle for any one of these tasks enables the resolution of the other two.<n>We propose new methods for each problem based on direct adaptations of well-established methods borrowed from the other disciplines.
• Score: 58.91436551466064
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: When the distribution of the data used to train a classifier differs from that of the test data, i.e., under dataset shift, well-established routines for calibrating the decision scores of the classifier, estimating the proportion of positives in a test sample, or estimating the accuracy of the classifier, become particularly challenging. This paper investigates the interconnections among three fundamental problems, calibration, quantification, and classifier accuracy prediction, under dataset shift conditions. Specifically, we prove their equivalence through mutual reduction, i.e., we show that access to an oracle for any one of these tasks enables the resolution of the other two. Based on these proofs, we propose new methods for each problem based on direct adaptations of well-established methods borrowed from the other disciplines. Our results show such methods are often competitive, and sometimes even surpass the performance of dedicated approaches from each discipline. The main goal of this paper is to fostering cross-fertilization among these research areas, encouraging the development of unified approaches and promoting synergies across the fields.

Related papers

• Beyond Model Adaptation at Test Time: A Survey [43.03129492126422]
  Machine learning algorithms struggle when samples in the test distribution start to deviate from the ones observed during training. Test-time adaptation combines the benefits of domain adaptation and domain generalization by training models only on source data. We provide a comprehensive and systematic review on test-time adaptation, covering more than 400 recent papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-06T06:13:57Z)
• Adapting Conformal Prediction to Distribution Shifts Without Labels [16.478151550456804]
  Conformal prediction (CP) enables machine learning models to output prediction sets with guaranteed coverage rate. Our goal is to improve the quality of CP-generated prediction sets using only unlabeled data from the test domain. This is achieved by two new methods called ECP and EACP, that adjust the score function in CP according to the base model's uncertainty on the unlabeled test data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-03T15:16:02Z)
• Group Robust Classification Without Any Group Information [5.053622900542495]
  This study contends that current bias-unsupervised approaches to group robustness continue to rely on group information to achieve optimal performance. bias labels are still crucial for effective model selection, restricting the practicality of these methods in real-world scenarios. We propose a revised methodology for training and validating debiased models in an entirely bias-unsupervised manner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T01:29:18Z)
• Assaying Out-Of-Distribution Generalization in Transfer Learning [103.57862972967273]
  We take a unified view of previous work, highlighting message discrepancies that we address empirically. We fine-tune over 31k networks, from nine different architectures in the many- and few-shot setting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-19T12:52:33Z)
• Identifying the Context Shift between Test Benchmarks and Production Data [1.2259552039796024]
  There exists a performance gap between machine learning models' accuracy on dataset benchmarks and real-world production data. We outline two methods for identifying changes in context that lead to distribution shifts and model prediction errors. We present two case-studies to highlight the implicit assumptions underlying applied machine learning models that tend to lead to errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-03T14:54:54Z)
• Leveraging Unlabeled Data to Predict Out-of-Distribution Performance [63.740181251997306]
  Real-world machine learning deployments are characterized by mismatches between the source (training) and target (test) distributions. In this work, we investigate methods for predicting the target domain accuracy using only labeled source data and unlabeled target data. We propose Average Thresholded Confidence (ATC), a practical method that learns a threshold on the model's confidence, predicting accuracy as the fraction of unlabeled examples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-11T23:01:12Z)
• Semi-supervised Long-tailed Recognition using Alternate Sampling [95.93760490301395]
  Main challenges in long-tailed recognition come from the imbalanced data distribution and sample scarcity in its tail classes. We propose a new recognition setting, namely semi-supervised long-tailed recognition. We demonstrate significant accuracy improvements over other competitive methods on two datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-01T00:43:38Z)
• Domain Adaptative Causality Encoder [52.779274858332656]
  We leverage the characteristics of dependency trees and adversarial learning to address the tasks of adaptive causality identification and localisation. We present a new causality dataset, namely MedCaus, which integrates all types of causality in the text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-27T04:14:55Z)
• Towards Model-Agnostic Post-Hoc Adjustment for Balancing Ranking Fairness and Algorithm Utility [54.179859639868646]
  Bipartite ranking aims to learn a scoring function that ranks positive individuals higher than negative ones from labeled data. There have been rising concerns on whether the learned scoring function can cause systematic disparity across different protected groups. We propose a model post-processing framework for balancing them in the bipartite ranking scenario.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-15T10:08:39Z)

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.