Conformal Tradeoffs: Guarantees Beyond Coverage

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.18045v1
• Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2026 07:58:25 GMT
• Title: Conformal Tradeoffs: Guarantees Beyond Coverage
• Abstract summary: Deployed conformal predictors are long-lived decision infrastructure operating over finite operational windows.<n> Marginal coverage does not determine deployment-facing quantities.<n>We provide a framework for operational certification and planning beyond coverage.
• Score: 0.02648566468224904
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Deployed conformal predictors are long-lived decision infrastructure operating over finite operational windows. The real-world question is not only ``Does the true label lie in the prediction set at the target rate?'' (marginal coverage), but ``How often does the system commit versus defer? What error exposure does it induce when it acts? How do these rates trade off?'' Marginal coverage does not determine these deployment-facing quantities: the same calibrated thresholds can yield different operational profiles depending on score geometry. We provide a framework for operational certification and planning beyond coverage with three contributions. (1) Small-Sample Beta Correction (SSBC): we invert the exact finite-sample Beta/rank law for split conformal to map a user request $(α^\star,δ)$ to a calibrated grid point with PAC-style semantics, yielding explicit finite-window coverage guarantees. (2) Calibrate-and-Audit: since no distribution-free pivot exists for rates beyond coverage, we introduce a two-stage design in which an independent audit set produces a reusable region -- label table and certified finite-window envelopes (Binomial/Beta-Binomial) for operational quantities -- commitment frequency, deferral, decisive error exposure, and commit purity -- via linear projection. (3) Geometric characterization: we describe feasibility constraints, regime boundaries (hedging vs.\ rejection), and cost-coherence conditions induced by a fixed conformal partition, explaining why operational rates are coupled and how calibration navigates their trade-offs. The output is an auditable operational menu: for a fixed scoring model, we trace attainable operational profiles across calibration settings and attach finite-window uncertainty envelopes. We demonstrate the approach on Tox21 toxicity prediction (12 endpoints) and aqueous solubility screening using AquaSolDB.

Related papers

• Exact Risk-Complexity Laws for Projective Boundaries in Scenario Optimization and Distribution-Free Certification [0.0]
  Conditional violation risk follows an exact beta law, whose tail has a beta-binomial representation and whose parameter is a support, calibration, or compression dimension.<n>This paper identifies the deterministic boundary mechanism behind these formulas and derives the corresponding law when the observed boundary size is random.<n>It also yields conditional probabilistic certificates and a no-go result explaining why observed complexity alone is insufficient.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-01T14:58:38Z)
• Certifying Plans under Model Mismatch: A Trilemma for Reachability from Scarce Data [5.455772242709494]
  Sim-to-real policies are designed under nominal dynamics, but target-system trials may yield only a few isolated one-step transitions.<n>We study pre-execution certification of a fixed control sequence, such as an action chunk produced by a learned policy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-03T16:28:26Z)
• Lottery Tickets Are Not Deployment Tickets [4.230349220081444]
  We study whether an accuracy-matched lottery ticket or another sparse challenger can replace an incumbent dense model without reconfiguring downstream decision logic.<n>Across experiments, sparse candidates repeatedly recover dense-reference accuracy yet remain behaviorally different.<n>In small-gap settings with fixed-threshold policy diagnostics, lottery-ticket replacement changes 7% to 10% of accept-review decisions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-29T15:25:19Z)
• Partial Causal Structure Learning for Valid Selective Conformal Inference under Interventions [0.0]
  In genomics experiments, exchangeability often holds only within subsets of interventions that leave a target variable "unaffected"<n>Our contributions are: (i) a contamination-robust conformal coverage theorem that quantifies how misclassification of "unaffected" calibration examples degrades coverage via an explicit function $g(,n)$ of the contamination fraction and calibration set size; and (ii) a task-driven partial causal learning formulation that estimates only the binary descendant indicators $Z_a,i=mathbf1iinmathrmdesc(a)$ needed
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T18:58:22Z)
• Conditional Coverage Diagnostics for Conformal Prediction [47.93989136542648]
  We show that conditional coverage estimation can be a classification problem.<n>We call the resulting family of metrics excess risk of the target coverage (ERT)<n>We release an open-source package for ERT as well as previous conditional coverage metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-12T18:47:39Z)
• LEC: Linear Expectation Constraints for False-Discovery Control in Selective Prediction and Routing Systems [95.35293543918762]
  Large language models (LLMs) often generate unreliable answers, while uncertainty methods fail to fully distinguish correct from incorrect predictions.<n>We address this issue through the lens of false discovery rate (FDR) control, ensuring that among all accepted predictions, the proportion of errors does not exceed a target risk level.<n>We propose LEC, which reinterprets selective prediction as a constrained decision problem by enforcing a Linear Expectation Constraint.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-01T11:27:09Z)
• Beyond Uncertainty Sets: Leveraging Optimal Transport to Extend Conformal Predictive Distribution to Multivariate Settings [0.14504054468850666]
  Conformal prediction (CP) constructs uncertainty sets for model outputs with finite-sample coverage guarantees.<n>We show that optimal assignment is piecewise-constant across a fixed polyhedral partition of the score space.<n>This allows us to characterize the entire prediction set tractably, and provides the machinery to address a deeper limitation of prediction sets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-19T05:59:01Z)
• Unsupervised Conformal Inference: Bootstrapping and Alignment to Control LLM Uncertainty [49.19257648205146]
  We propose an unsupervised conformal inference framework for generation.<n>Our gates achieve close-to-nominal coverage and provide tighter, more stable thresholds than split UCP.<n>The result is a label-free, API-compatible gate for test-time filtering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-26T23:40:47Z)
• COIN: Uncertainty-Guarding Selective Question Answering for Foundation Models with Provable Risk Guarantees [51.5976496056012]
  COIN is an uncertainty-guarding selection framework that calibrates statistically valid thresholds to filter a single generated answer per question.<n>COIN estimates the empirical error rate on a calibration set and applies confidence interval methods to establish a high-probability upper bound on the true error rate.<n>We demonstrate COIN's robustness in risk control, strong test-time power in retaining admissible answers, and predictive efficiency under limited calibration data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-25T07:04:49Z)
• Coverage-Guaranteed Speech Emotion Recognition via Calibrated Uncertainty-Adaptive Prediction Sets [0.0]
  Road rage, often triggered by emotional suppression and sudden outbursts, significantly threatens road safety by causing collisions and aggressive behavior.<n>Speech emotion recognition technologies can mitigate this risk by identifying negative emotions early and issuing timely alerts.<n>We propose a novel risk-controlled prediction framework providing statistically rigorous guarantees on prediction accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-24T12:26:28Z)
• Distribution-free uncertainty quantification for classification under label shift [105.27463615756733]
  We focus on uncertainty quantification (UQ) for classification problems via two avenues. We first argue that label shift hurts UQ, by showing degradation in coverage and calibration. We examine these techniques theoretically in a distribution-free framework and demonstrate their excellent practical performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-04T20:51:03Z)
• Distribution-free binary classification: prediction sets, confidence intervals and calibration [106.50279469344937]
  We study three notions of uncertainty quantification -- calibration, confidence intervals and prediction sets -- for binary classification in the distribution-free setting. We derive confidence intervals for binned probabilities for both fixed-width and uniform-mass binning. As a consequence of our 'tripod' theorems, these confidence intervals for binned probabilities lead to distribution-free calibration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-18T14:17:29Z)

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.