Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

On Information-Theoretic Measures of Predictive 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 2410.10786 v2 pith:N7G3KKC3 submitted 2024-10-14 cs.LG cs.AIstat.ML

classification cs.LGcs.AIstat.ML
keywords measuresuncertaintypredictivedatafactorsframeworkinformation-theoreticmodel
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Reliable estimation of predictive uncertainty is crucial for machine learning applications, particularly in high-stakes scenarios where hedging against risks is essential. Despite its significance, there is no universal agreement on how to best quantify predictive uncertainty. In this work, we revisit core concepts to propose a framework for information-theoretic measures of predictive uncertainty. Our proposed framework categorizes predictive uncertainty measures according to two factors: (I) The predicting model (II) The approximation of the true predictive distribution. Examining all possible combinations of these two factors, we derive a set of predictive uncertainty measures that includes both known and newly introduced ones. We extensively evaluate these measures across a broad set of tasks, identifying conditions under which certain measures excel. Our findings show the importance of aligning the choice of uncertainty measure with the predicting model on in-distribution (ID) data, the limitations of epistemic uncertainty measures for out-of-distribution (OOD) data, and that the disentanglement between measures varies substantially between ID and OOD data. Together, these insights provide a more comprehensive understanding of predictive uncertainty measures, revealing their implicit assumptions and relationships.

Discussion (0). Sign in 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. Uncertainty Quantification with Proper Scoring Rules: Adjusting Measures to Prediction Tasks

    cs.LG 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Uncertainty measures derived from proper scoring rules should be chosen to match the task loss; total uncertainty suits selective prediction, zero-one loss suits active learning.

  2. Position: Uncertainty Quantification Needs Reassessment for Large-language Model Agents

    cs.LG 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A position paper arguing that aleatoric/epistemic uncertainty splits fail for LLM agents and proposing underspecification, interaction, and output-based uncertainty research.

Pith tools