Conformal Calibration for Multi-Modal Regression with Missing Modalities

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.07795v1
• Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2026 22:38:35 GMT
• Title: Conformal Calibration for Multi-Modal Regression with Missing Modalities
• Abstract summary: Prediction intervals for multi-modal regression are difficult to calibrate when sources disagree or one is missing.<n>We address this through a modality-aware conformal calibration layer.<n>The layer trains or reuses one predictor per modality, computes a disagreement score from their predictions, and uses that score in split conformal calibration.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Prediction intervals for multi-modal regression with tabular variables, text, images, or other input sources are difficult to calibrate when those sources disagree or one is missing. A single global quantile averages these regimes together instead of calibrating to the modality pattern observed at test time. We address this through a modality-aware conformal calibration layer. The layer trains or reuses one predictor per modality, computes a disagreement score from their predictions, and uses that score in split conformal calibration under a strict split protocol. We use the score in two complementary ways. First, a continuous disagreement-scaled method reallocates interval width across examples while preserving the usual marginal split-conformal guarantee. Second, a Mondrian (stratified) method calibrates within groups defined by disagreement or modality availability fixed before calibration, giving group guarantees under joint exchangeability of the calibration and test examples. Across four multi-modal datasets, the disagreement-scaled layer matches or improves the marginal conformal baseline in 59 of 60 paired runs for interval continuous ranked probability score (CRPS) and in 52 of 60 for interval width, while keeping empirical coverage near the 95% target. In stress tests with missing modalities, mask-matched recalibration recovers up to 19.5 percentage points of coverage in the hardest fixed-mask regime. The result is a simple, model-agnostic reliability layer for multi-modal regression systems. A project page is available at https://unco3892.github.io/modality-aware-conformal.

Related papers

• Replicable Conformal Prediction [0.3058685580689604]
  Two analysts calibrate the same predictive model on independent samples every time.<n>No one can verify that two calibrations produced the same object.<n>We show that sharing a single random seed and rounding the calibrated threshold up to a coarse shared grid resolves the tension.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-23T17:47:40Z)
• Reaching the Tail: Calibration Diversity Drives Conformal Coverage under Data Scarcity [0.0]
  Multi-horizon rare-event forecasting is hard under long macroeconomic series' data constraints.<n>A controlled ablation shows an apparent rare-event threshold for Adaptive Conformal Inference instead reflects calibration-set size.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-21T19:51:08Z)
• Discovery of Hidden Miscalibration Regimes [52.452902154360565]
  Models may be systematically overconfident on some kinds of inputs and underconfident on others.<n>We define the corresponding miscalibration field and propose a diagnostic framework for estimating it.<n>Our approach learns a calibration-aware representation of the input space and estimates signed local miscalibration by kernel smoothing in the learned geometry.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T13:07:50Z)
• Correction and Corruption: A Two-Rate View of Error Flow in LLM Protocols [51.56484100374058]
  We propose a paired-outcome measurement interface for auditing a single protocol step on exact-match tasks.<n>For each instance, the interface records a baseline correctness bit and a post-step correctness bit.<n>These rates predict accuracy changes and define a reusable empirical interface testable across seeds, mixtures, and pipelines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-20T13:25:40Z)
• Post-Hoc Split-Point Self-Consistency Verification for Efficient, Unified Quantification of Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty in Deep Learning [5.996056764788456]
  Uncertainty quantification (UQ) is vital for trustworthy deep learning, yet existing methods are either computationally intensive or provide only partial, task-specific estimates.<n>We propose a post-hoc single-forward-pass framework that jointly captures aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty without modifying or retraining pretrained models.<n>Our method applies emphSplit-Point Analysis (SPA) to decompose predictive residuals into upper and lower subsets, computing emphMean Absolute Residuals (MARs) on each side.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-16T17:16:01Z)
• Adaptive Uncertainty Quantification for Generative AI [0.0]
  Mirroring split-conformal inference, we design a wrapper around a black-box algorithm which calibrates conformity scores.<n> adaptive partitioning is achieved by fitting a robust regression tree to the conformity scores on the calibration set.<n>Unlike traditional split-conformal inference, adaptive splitting and within-group calibration yields adaptive bands which can stretch and shrink locally.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-16T19:37:33Z)
• Localized Calibration: Metrics and Recalibration [133.07044916594361]
  We propose a fine-grained calibration metric that spans the gap between fully global and fully individualized calibration. We then introduce a localized recalibration method, LoRe, that improves the LCE better than existing recalibration methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-22T07:22:12Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• 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.