Decision Making Needs Uncertainty Quantification [Lecture Notes]
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.14407v2
- Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2026 14:44:07 GMT
- Title: Decision Making Needs Uncertainty Quantification [Lecture Notes]
- Abstract summary: This lecture note develops, from first principles and within a single decision-theoretic setting, the link between the objective and the knowledge of an agent.<n>We show that a risk-neutral agent needs the posterior distribution over the state, whereas a risk-averse agent can rely without loss of optimality on a prediction set and a worst-case decision rule.
- Score: 35.36148913066079
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Many signal processing systems ultimately exist to {act}. Whenever the state variable that determines the action to be taken by a decision maker, or agent, is uncertain, the way that uncertainty is represented decides how well the agent performs and how much its performance can be trusted. This lecture note develops, from first principles and within a single decision-theoretic setting, the link between the {objective} and the knowledge of an agent and the form of uncertainty representation that is sufficient to act optimally. To start, assuming a known environment distribution, we show that a risk-neutral agent needs the posterior distribution over the state, whereas a risk-averse agent can rely without loss of optimality on a {prediction set} and a worst-case decision rule. We then turn to the case in which the environment is unknown, and identify three complementary approaches to address the resulting epistemic uncertainty: calibration of a fixed predictor, credal (ambiguity) sets with distributionally robust optimization, and Bayesian inference over model parameters. The common thread is that reliable decisions require an uncertainty representation matched to the decision objective and to the knowledge profile of the agent, together with a guarantee that certifies the utility the agent will actually obtain.
Related papers
- Prediction Sets for Counterfactual Decisions: Coverage, Optimality, and Conformal Prediction [7.899668963928307]
We develop a decision-theoretic framework for uncertainty-informed counterfactual decisions.<n>We identify a novel notion of emphpolicy-coupled coverage -- namely, coverage of the realized outcome under the action induced by the prediction sets themselves.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-07-02T14:13:08Z) - Confidence Laundering in Agent Systems: Why Uncertainty Needs a Latent Carrier [19.977378656876645]
We argue that uncertainty does not propagate simply because a trajectory contains uncertain steps; it propagates only when it survives the handoff between components.<n>We propose latent uncertainty as an uncertainty-bearing carrier attached to decision handoffs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-09T23:13:53Z) - Exploring Agentic Tool-Calling Decisions via Uncertainty-Aligned Reinforcement Learning [63.24624171679711]
Large language model (LLM)-based agents often make suboptimal tool-use decisions.<n>We propose TRUST, which incorporates uncertainty quantification into reward design as a repulsive force for maintaining uncertainty separation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-05T07:08:34Z) - Uncertainty-Driven Reliability: Selective Prediction and Trustworthy Deployment in Modern Machine Learning [1.2183405753834562]
This thesis investigates how uncertainty estimation can enhance the safety and trustworthiness of machine learning (ML) systems.<n>We first show that a model's training trajectory contains rich uncertainty signals that can be exploited without altering its architecture or loss.<n>We propose a lightweight, post-hoc abstention method that works across tasks, avoids the cost of deep ensembles, and achieves state-of-the-art selective prediction performance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-11T02:33:53Z) - A Principled Approach to Randomized Selection under Uncertainty: Applications to Peer Review and Grant Funding [61.86327960322782]
We propose a principled framework for randomized decision-making based on interval estimates of the quality of each item.<n>We introduce MERIT, an optimization-based method that maximizes the worst-case expected number of top candidates selected.<n>We prove that MERIT satisfies desirable axiomatic properties not guaranteed by existing approaches.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-23T19:59:30Z) - SConU: Selective Conformal Uncertainty in Large Language Models [59.25881667640868]
We propose a novel approach termed Selective Conformal Uncertainty (SConU)<n>We develop two conformal p-values that are instrumental in determining whether a given sample deviates from the uncertainty distribution of the calibration set at a specific manageable risk level.<n>Our approach not only facilitates rigorous management of miscoverage rates across both single-domain and interdisciplinary contexts, but also enhances the efficiency of predictions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-19T03:01:45Z) - Decision Theoretic Foundations for Conformal Prediction: Optimal Uncertainty Quantification for Risk-Averse Agents [24.938391962245877]
We develop decision-theoretic foundations that connect uncertainty using prediction sets with risk-averse decision-making.<n>We experimentally demonstrate the significant advantages of Risk-Averse (RAC) in applications such as medical diagnosis and recommendation systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-04T18:37:10Z) - Probabilistic Modeling of Disparity Uncertainty for Robust and Efficient Stereo Matching [61.73532883992135]
We propose a new uncertainty-aware stereo matching framework.<n>We adopt Bayes risk as the measurement of uncertainty and use it to separately estimate data and model uncertainty.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-12-24T23:28:20Z) - Know Where You're Uncertain When Planning with Multimodal Foundation Models: A Formal Framework [54.40508478482667]
We present a comprehensive framework to disentangle, quantify, and mitigate uncertainty in perception and plan generation.<n>We propose methods tailored to the unique properties of perception and decision-making.<n>We show that our uncertainty disentanglement framework reduces variability by up to 40% and enhances task success rates by 5% compared to baselines.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-03T17:32:00Z) - Criticality and Safety Margins for Reinforcement Learning [53.10194953873209]
We seek to define a criticality framework with both a quantifiable ground truth and a clear significance to users.<n>We introduce true criticality as the expected drop in reward when an agent deviates from its policy for n consecutive random actions.<n>We also introduce the concept of proxy criticality, a low-overhead metric that has a statistically monotonic relationship to true criticality.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-26T21:00:45Z) - Reliability-Aware Prediction via Uncertainty Learning for Person Image
Retrieval [51.83967175585896]
UAL aims at providing reliability-aware predictions by considering data uncertainty and model uncertainty simultaneously.
Data uncertainty captures the noise" inherent in the sample, while model uncertainty depicts the model's confidence in the sample's prediction.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-10-24T17:53:20Z) - Ensemble Quantile Networks: Uncertainty-Aware Reinforcement Learning
with Applications in Autonomous Driving [1.6758573326215689]
Reinforcement learning can be used to create a decision-making agent for autonomous driving.
Previous approaches provide only black-box solutions, which do not offer information on how confident the agent is about its decisions.
This paper introduces the Ensemble Quantile Networks (EQN) method, which combines distributional RL with an ensemble approach to obtain a complete uncertainty estimate.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-05-21T10:36:16Z)
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.