Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Identifying Drivers of Predictive Aleatoric Uncertainty

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2312.07252 v3 pith:ILASQTHS submitted 2023-12-12 cs.LG stat.ML

classification cs.LGstat.ML
keywords uncertaintyexplanationsmodelpredictivealeatoricapproachapproachesdrivers
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Explainability and uncertainty quantification are key to trustable artificial intelligence. However, the reasoning behind uncertainty estimates is generally left unexplained. Identifying the drivers of uncertainty complements explanations of point predictions in recognizing model limitations and enhancing transparent decision-making. So far, explanations of uncertainties have been rarely studied. The few exceptions rely on Bayesian neural networks or technically intricate approaches, such as auxiliary generative models, thereby hindering their broad adoption. We propose a straightforward approach to explain predictive aleatoric uncertainties. We estimate uncertainty in regression as predictive variance by adapting a neural network with a Gaussian output distribution. Subsequently, we apply out-of-the-box explainers to the model's variance output. This approach can explain uncertainty influences more reliably than complex published approaches, which we demonstrate in a synthetic setting with a known data-generating process. We substantiate our findings with a nuanced, quantitative benchmark including synthetic and real, tabular and image datasets. For this, we adapt metrics from conventional XAI research to uncertainty explanations. Overall, the proposed method explains uncertainty estimates with little modifications to the model architecture and outperforms more intricate methods in most settings.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Unveil Sources of Uncertainty: Feature Contribution to Conformal Prediction Intervals

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A model-agnostic framework decomposes conformal prediction interval width and bounds into feature-level contributions using Shapley and proportional Shapley values.

  2. Predictive Multiplicity in Survival Models: A Method for Quantifying Model Uncertainty in Predictive Maintenance Applications

    cs.LG 2025-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Near-optimal survival models can give conflicting failure-risk estimates for the same equipment, and the proposed ambiguity, discrepancy, and obscurity metrics quantify this on CMAPSS engine data.

Pith tools