Spiking the training data to correct for test set contamination

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.24818v1
• Date: Sun, 24 May 2026 02:06:59 GMT
• Title: Spiking the training data to correct for test set contamination
• Abstract summary: We propose to spike the training data by intentionally contaminating some test examples at known rates.<n>The spiked examples can then be used to calibrate predictors of model memorization which enable principled statistical correction of inflated test scores.
• Score: 28.940486760749025
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The literature on test set contamination largely focuses on detection, but the correction of contaminated test scores is underexplored. Our core proposal is to spike the training data by intentionally contaminating some test examples at known rates. The spiked examples can then be used to calibrate predictors of model memorization which enable principled statistical correction of inflated test scores. To evaluate different correction estimators, we first present a simulation framework based on the Hubble models. Hubble models come in minimal pairs, where the perturbed model was deliberately contaminated with several test sets, while the standard model was not, serving as the counterfactual and correction target. We consider estimators that use information from a memorization predictor, correctness predictor, or both. In simulation, we establish basic statistical intuitions and show that estimators leveraging memorization and correctness information are better than naive estimation which makes no correction at all. We then instantiate several memorization and correctness predictors, and find that simple predictors such as Platt-scaled membership inference metrics provide good signal for correction. Finally, we examine the practical considerations of spiking. Simple memorization predictors need no more than 10 examples for calibration and often transfer from one dataset to another. Taken together, spiking is a promising solution for test set contamination.

Related papers

• Goodness-of-Fit Tests and Calibration Machine-Learning Algorithms for Logistic Regression with Sparse Data [0.0]
  This thesis studies classical GOF tests for binary logistic regression under both grouped and sparse data.<n>It shows that many of these tests fail to give valid conclusions when exposed to the complexities of actual datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-11T17:00:50Z)
• Calibration without labels in multiple testing [2.435006380732194]
  Large-scale hypothesis testing supports probability claims about individual hypotheses, as in empirical Bayes methods for estimating local false discovery rates.<n>We study how such claims can be interpreted as approximately calibrated forecasts of the null hypothesis, yielding interpretable error probabilities even under model misspecification.<n>We address this challenge by constructing a set of pseudo-labels, derived from the spacings of ordered $p$-values, which have the local false discovery rate as their regression target.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-18T03:06:11Z)
• Provably Reliable Conformal Prediction Sets in the Presence of Data Poisoning [53.42244686183879]
  Conformal prediction provides model-agnostic and distribution-free uncertainty quantification.<n>Yet, conformal prediction is not reliable under poisoning attacks where adversaries manipulate both training and calibration data.<n>We propose reliable prediction sets (RPS): the first efficient method for constructing conformal prediction sets with provable reliability guarantees under poisoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-13T15:37:11Z)
• 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.<n>We propose a new post-hoc calibration objective derived from the aim of calibration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-19T17:25:43Z)
• Uncertainty-Calibrated Test-Time Model Adaptation without Forgetting [65.21599711087538]
  Test-time adaptation (TTA) seeks to tackle potential distribution shifts between training and test data by adapting a given model w.r.t. any test sample.<n>Prior methods perform backpropagation for each test sample, resulting in unbearable optimization costs to many applications.<n>We propose an Efficient Anti-Forgetting Test-Time Adaptation (EATA) method which develops an active sample selection criterion to identify reliable and non-redundant samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-18T05:49:45Z)
• Learning Sample Difficulty from Pre-trained Models for Reliable Prediction [55.77136037458667]
  We propose to utilize large-scale pre-trained models to guide downstream model training with sample difficulty-aware entropy regularization. We simultaneously improve accuracy and uncertainty calibration across challenging benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-20T07:29:23Z)
• Calibration tests beyond classification [30.616624345970973]
  Most supervised machine learning tasks are subject to irreducible prediction errors. Probabilistic predictive models address this limitation by providing probability distributions that represent a belief over plausible targets. Calibrated models guarantee that the predictions are neither over- nor under-confident.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-21T09:49:57Z)
• Calibrated Selective Classification [34.08454890436067]
  We develop a new approach to selective classification in which we propose a method for rejecting examples with "uncertain" uncertainties. We present a framework for learning selectively calibrated models, where a separate selector network is trained to improve the selective calibration error of a given base model. We demonstrate the empirical effectiveness of our approach on multiple image classification and lung cancer risk assessment tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-25T13:31:09Z)
• 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)
• Conformal Prediction Under Feedback Covariate Shift for Biomolecular Design [56.86533144730384]
  We introduce a method to quantify predictive uncertainty in settings where the training and test data are statistically dependent.<n>As a motivating use case, we demonstrate with several real data sets how our method quantifies uncertainty for the predicted fitness of designed proteins.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-08T02:59:12Z)
• Individual Calibration with Randomized Forecasting [116.2086707626651]
  We show that calibration for individual samples is possible in the regression setup if the predictions are randomized. We design a training objective to enforce individual calibration and use it to train randomized regression functions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-18T05:53:10Z)

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.