Instance-Wise Monotonic Calibration by Constrained Transformation

Gustavo Batista; Salil S. Kanhere; Yunrui Zhang

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 18 references

Instance-Wise Monotonic Calibration by Constrained Transformation

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A constrained map in sorted-logit space can calibrate deep networks while preserving each instance's class ranking, and the paper reports state-of-the-art ECE on CIFAR and ImageNet with only O(m) parameters.

desk verdict A novel, interpretable calibration parameterization whose central monotonicity theorem is false as stated; repairable, but the submitted claim doesn't hold. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.06516 v1 pith:MU7W72Y3 submitted 2025-07-09 cs.LG stat.ML

Yunrui Zhang , Gustavo Batista , Salil S. Kanhere This is my paper

classification cs.LGstat.ML

keywords post-hoccalibrationmonotonicexpectederrorconstrainedoptimizationlogittransformationinstance-wisemonotonicityinterpretabledeepneuralnetworks

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Deep networks often output overconfident probabilities, and post-hoc calibration fixes this by fitting a map from raw logits to calibrated probabilities. This paper proposes a calibration map that first sorts a sample's logits, applies a per-rank positive scale and shift, and maps them back; monotonicity constraints on the scale and shift keep the class ranking unchanged. The authors argue this gives an interpretable, expressively strong alternative to temperature scaling and to black-box monotonic networks, with only O(m) parameters where m is the number of classes. On CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, and ImageNet, the proposed MCCT and MCCT-I maps report the best expected calibration error among the compared methods while remaining stable with small calibration sets.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the sorted-logit affine map $f(Z)=S^{-1}(S(Z)\odot w+b)$, where $S$ orders the logits from smallest to largest, $\odot$ is elementwise multiplication, and $S^{-1}$ returns the transformed values to their original class positions. Monotonicity is enforced by constraining consecutive differences of $w$ and $b$ to be non-negative, with $w$ positive; the parameters are fit by minimizing negative log-likelihood under these constraints in sorted logit space. The variant MCCT-I replaces $S(Z)\odot w$ with $S(Z)/w$, which changes the gradient by a $1/w^2$ factor and acts as an implicit regularizer. This construction is what carries the argument: it makes the parameter count linear in the number of classes, keeps the map interpretable per rank, and, on the paper's claim, preserves the class ranking of every instance.

What would settle it

Take any real logit vector with one negative value, e.g. Z=(-5,-4), and apply the MCCT map with w=(1,10) and b=(0,0); the transformed values become (-5,-40), reversing the order. Scanning ImageNet or CIFAR logits for such reversals would show whether the monotonicity guarantee holds on actual data.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that instance-wise monotonic calibration can be achieved with a constrained, linearly parameterized transformation in sorted-logit space. For a logit vector Z, the map f(Z)=$S^{{-1}}$(S(Z) \odot w + b) is monotonic whenever w is positive and non-decreasing and b is non-decreasing, because an order-preserving affine scaling of sorted logits is then inverse-sorted back to the original class indices. A variant MCCT-I uses division by w instead of multiplication, which the authors report regularizes the scale and helps on many-class problems. The paper reports that this family, trained by constrained negative log-likelihood optimization, reaches state-of-the-art ECE on eleven model-dataset pairs and preserves accuracy by construction.

Load-bearing premise

The proof assumes sorted logits are non-negative so that multiplying by a non-decreasing positive weight cannot reverse their order, but neural-network logits contain negative values and the paper never enforces or checks this.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A single monotone map with O(m) parameters can replace temperature scaling's one parameter without giving up ranking preservation; this widens the expressiveness of monotonic calibration.
Because the map never changes the predicted class, calibration no longer trades away accuracy; non-monotonic baselines in the paper measurably reduce accuracy on uncertain samples.
The method is data-efficient: on ImageNet the reported ECE stays stable when the calibration set is cut to 10% of its original size, and on CIFAR-100 ECE varies by less than 30% in the same test.
The top-k truncation variant keeps ECE stable down to about 300 of 1000 ImageNet classes, cutting training time from about 55 minutes to a few minutes, supporting many-class use.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The monotonicity proof implicitly assumes sorted logits are non-negative; on real logits with negative values, multiplying by a non-decreasing positive vector can reverse order. Normalizing or shifting logits to be non-negative before applying the map would restore the stated guarantee.
The per-rank stabilization of w and b on ImageNet suggests a practical diagnostic: the rank at which the fitted parameters stop changing marks where low-ranked logits stop carrying calibration signal, so the same elbow could guide top-k selection on other large-scale classifiers.
The constrained sorted-logit map is a natural template beyond classifier calibration: any system that needs rank-preserving rescaling of ordered scores, such as detection confidence or OOD scores, could reuse the same constraints with a linear parameter budget.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: the core trick is new and worth discussing, but Theorem 1 is false as stated, and that theorem is the whole load-bearing guarantee.

What's actually new: a per-rank affine map on sorted logits, S^{-1}(S(Z)⊙w + b), with monotonicity enforced by nondecreasing positive w and nondecreasing b. That's a clean, interpretable parameterization that is linear in class count, unlike TS/ETS (too few parameters) or DIAG/PTS (neural nets). The data-efficiency experiments and the top-k truncation for many classes are sensible, and the code is public. On the evidence in the tables, the empirical ECE numbers are competitive; that part is not in dispute.

The soft spot is mathematical and it's central. The proof of Theorem 1 claims that because S(Z), w, and b are nondecreasing, the elementwise product S(Z)⊙w preserves ordering. That is only guaranteed if all entries of S(Z) are nonnegative. Real logits are signed; the paper itself says per-rank logits are approximately normal. Counterexample: S(Z)=(-5,-4), w=(1,10), b=(0,0). Transformed is (-5,-40), which reverses the order, violating Definition 4. Theorem 2 has the same issue with division. The method neither enforces nonnegativity nor checks empirically that rankings are preserved. So the headline contribution—instance-wise monotonic calibration—is unsupported.

That said, the flaw is repairable. Shift logits to be nonnegative, or work with probabilities, or add a constraint. The idea is not dead. The empirical claims would also be stronger with error bars and with an explicit check that accuracy is preserved, since the tables only report ECE.

Bottom line: this deserves a real referee, not a desk reject. The novel parameterization and the top-k analysis are worth serious engagement. But the current submission overstates its guarantee, and a revision that fixes the monotonicity condition and reports ranking-preservation statistics is needed.

My verdict: send to review, expect major revision.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes MCCT and MCCT-I, post-hoc calibration maps that sort logits, apply an elementwise positive and non-decreasing weight vector w and a non-decreasing bias b, then invert the sorting permutation. The authors claim this transformation is instance-wise monotonic (Theorem 1), that an inverse-scaling variant is also monotonic (Theorem 2), and that the resulting O(m)-parameter maps are expressive, interpretable, data-efficient, and achieve state-of-the-art ECE on CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, and ImageNet. Experiments compare against seven baselines and include data-efficiency and top-k experiments.

Significance. If the monotonicity guarantee were correct, the proposed method would be a practically attractive post-hoc calibration tool: it is simple, interpretable, has linear parameter count, and the empirical ECE improvements over several baselines are suggestive. However, the central theoretical claim is false as stated. Because the paper's headline contribution is the rigorous preservation of instance-wise ranking, and because the method never checks whether that ranking is actually preserved in practice, the theoretical foundation of the work is not established. The empirical results alone — though they show competitive ECE numbers in some settings — do not compensate for the failure of the core guarantee.

major comments (3)

[§3.1, Theorem 1] Theorem 1 is false as stated. The proof asserts that because S(Z), w, and b are all non-decreasing, the vector S(Z) ⊙ w + b preserves the ordering of S(Z). This is only true when all entries of S(Z) are non-negative. For signed logits, a non-decreasing positive weight vector can reverse the order. A concrete counterexample satisfying the theorem's hypotheses is S(Z) = (-5, -4), w = (1, 10), b = (0, 0): the transformed vector is (-5, -40), which violates the order -5 ≤ -4. Since real neural network logits are signed — as the paper itself notes when it says per-rank logits are approximately normal — the monotonicity guarantee does not apply to the method's actual inputs. The constraints dw_i ≥ 0, db_i ≥ 0, and w_i > 0 are necessary but not sufficient; the paper neither enforces non-negativity of S(Z) nor verifies after fitting that the final transformation is monotonic on the evaluation data.
[§3.2, Theorem 2] Theorem 2 has the same defect. The map f(Z) = S^{-1}(S(Z)/w + b) is claimed to be monotonic when w is positive and non-increasing and b is non-decreasing. For negative sorted logits, division by a non-increasing positive sequence can also reverse order. The same counterexample structure applies; for example S(Z) = (-5, -4) with w = (10, 1) gives (-0.5, -4), which is decreasing rather than increasing. The assertion that Theorem 2 is 'mathematically equivalent' to Theorem 1 therefore inherits the error, and the proposed method does not obtain a monotonic map.
[§5.3] The paper repeatedly calls the method 'accuracy-preserving' and 'ranking-preserving,' but no experiment measures how often the transformed logits change the predicted class or reverse the order of the original probabilities. Since Theorem 1 is false for signed logits, the claim that MCCT and MCCT-I preserve instance-wise ranking is not supported by either theory or direct measurement. Adding an explicit evaluation of top-1 prediction stability and rank correlation between pre- and post-calibration outputs would be necessary to assess even the empirical (rather than guaranteed) behavior of the method.

minor comments (4)

[§3.1] The sentence 'we enforce monotonicity by requiring the consecutive differences of dw and db to be strictly positive' is inconsistent with the displayed constraints, which only require dw,i ≥ 0 and db,i ≥ 0; the paper should state clearly whether the differences are non-negative or strictly positive, as this affects the argument that ties are avoided.
[§5.1] The paper reports 'averaged over 10 runs' in Tables 1–3 but gives no standard deviations, standard errors, or error bars; for differences between methods that are sometimes a few hundredths of a percent, this makes it difficult to judge whether the reported improvements are statistically meaningful.
[§5.3] The sentence 'since S(Z) and also w and b are non-descending' uses 'non-descending'; the standard term is 'non-decreasing,' and this wording should be corrected.
[§5.1] For ImageNet-1K, the text says the original validation set is 'randomly divided 50-50 into a calibration set and a testing set,' but it is unclear how the random split was performed and whether the same split was used for all compared methods; the reproducibility of the experimental protocol would be improved by reporting this detail.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: parameters are fit on a held-out calibration set, ECE is measured on test data, and the Theorem 1 issue is a soundness flaw rather than a derivation that reduces to its own inputs.

full rationale

The paper's empirical evaluation is self-contained against external benchmarks: MCCT and MCCT-I parameters w and b are learned by minimizing NLL on a calibration set, and ECE, ECE-KDE, and EQ-BIN ECE are reported on held-out test sets. There is no fitted parameter that is later renamed as a prediction, and no quantity is defined in terms of the target result. The two self-citations by the present authors (Zhang et al., 2025a and 2025b) appear only as contextual examples of applications needing accurate probabilities; they are not load-bearing for the calibration construction or its evaluation. The most serious issue in the paper is the proof of Theorem 1, which asserts that because S(Z), w, and b are non-decreasing, the transformed sorted vector S(Z) ⊙ w + b preserves the ordering. The proof is not circular; it is mathematically incomplete because the elementwise product of a non-decreasing positive vector and a non-decreasing sequence preserves order only when the sequence is non-negative, and real logits can be negative. That is a correctness and soundness concern, not a circularity concern, because the claimed theorem does not assume or fit the property it is trying to establish. Likewise, Theorem 2 inherits the same soundness issue without any circular dependence on the paper's own results. The state-of-the-art ECE claims could be challenged on evaluation choices or statistical significance, but they are not forced by construction from the input data. Overall, the derivation chain is not circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The fitted parameters are the per-rank scale and bias vectors. The decisive unstated axiom is non-negativity of logits in the proof of monotonicity; without it the central theorem fails. No new entities are postulated.

free parameters (3)

w = learned per-rank scale vector
Monotone non-decreasing positive vector fitted by minimizing NLL on calibration set; O(m) parameters.
b = learned per-rank bias vector
Monotone non-decreasing bias vector fitted alongside w; O(m) parameters.
top-k truncation = recommended 400 for >500 classes
Hyperparameter that discards lower ranked logits to reduce cost; affects calibration performance and is set by the user.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption Pairwise distinct logits (Assumption 1)
Needed for strict total ordering of logits; authors state they observed no ties in experiments.
ad hoc to paper Non-negativity of sorted logits (implicit)
The monotonicity proof requires S(Z) ⊙ w to be non-decreasing, which is only guaranteed for non-negative S(Z); this is neither stated nor satisfied by real neural network logits.
domain assumption Calibration set is representative of test set
Standard assumption for post-hoc calibration; affects generalization but is common to all baselines.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Instance-Wise Monotonic Calibration by Constrained Transformation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MU7W72Y3

@misc{pith2026250706516,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Instance-Wise Monotonic Calibration by Constrained Transformation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MU7W72Y3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.06516}
}

read the original abstract

Deep neural networks often produce miscalibrated probability estimates, leading to overconfident predictions. A common approach for calibration is fitting a post-hoc calibration map on unseen validation data that transforms predicted probabilities. A key desirable property of the calibration map is instance-wise monotonicity (i.e., preserving the ranking of probability outputs). However, most existing post-hoc calibration methods do not guarantee monotonicity. Previous monotonic approaches either use an under-parameterized calibration map with limited expressive ability or rely on black-box neural networks, which lack interpretability and robustness. In this paper, we propose a family of novel monotonic post-hoc calibration methods, which employs a constrained calibration map parameterized linearly with respect to the number of classes. Our proposed approach ensures expressiveness, robustness, and interpretability while preserving the relative ordering of the probability output by formulating the proposed calibration map as a constrained optimization problem. Our proposed methods achieve state-of-the-art performance across datasets with different deep neural network models, outperforming existing calibration methods while being data and computation-efficient. Our code is available at https://github.com/YunruiZhang/Calibration-by-Constrained-Transformation

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.06516 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** The impact of calibration set size on ECE for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** The impact of top-k logit selection on ECE. The x-axis represents the top-k value, and the y-axis represents ECE. (a) ImageNet with ResNet-50, (b) ImageNet with ResNet-152 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The impact of top-k logit selection on training time. The x-axis represents the top-k value, and the y-axis represents training time in seconds. (a) ImageNet with ResNet-50, (b) ImageNet with ResNet-152. Another interesting phenomenon we observed during the top-k expe…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

18 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages

[1]

Then by using the chain rule we have the gradient vector of L w.r.t. B described as in Equation 7 A.1.2 MCCT-I For the calibration map described in the Theorem 2 we have f (Z) = S(Z) W + b (8) We can see that the ∂L ∂B is the same as the first calibration map. ∂f (Z) ∂W = − S(Z) W 2 (9) Equation 9 describes the gradient of f (Z) w.r.t. W . ∂L ∂W = ∂L ∂f (...

work page 2019
[6]

doi: 10.1109/CVPR.2017.243

IEEE Computer Society. doi: 10.1109/CVPR.2017.243. URL https://doi. ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/CVPR .2017.243. Dieter Kraft. A software package for sequential quadratic programming. Forschungsbericht- Deutsche Forschungs- und Versuchsanstalt fur Luft- und Raumfahrt,

doi:10.1109/cvpr.2017.243 2017
[13]

Rethinking the inception ar- chitecture for computer vision

Christian Szegedy, Vincent Vanhoucke, Sergey Ioffe, Jon Shlens, and Zbigniew Wojna. Rethinking the inception ar- chitecture for computer vision. In 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages 2818–2826,

work page 2016
[16]

Wide residual networks

Sergey Zagoruyko. Wide residual networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1605.07146,

arXiv
[17]

Revisit Time Series Classification Benchmark: The Impact of Temporal Information for Classification

URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v119/z hang20k.html. ISSN: 2640-3498. Yunrui Zhang, Gustavo Batista, and Salii S Kanhere. Label shift estimation with incremental prior update. In Pro- ceedings of the 2025 SIAM International Conference on Data Mining (SDM), pages 134–142. SIAM, 2025a. Yunrui Zhang, Gustavo Batista, and Salil S Kanhere. Re- visit time ser...

work page Pith review arXiv 2025
[29]

Mahdi Pakdaman Naeini, Gregory Cooper, and Milos Hauskrecht

arXiv:1906.02629 [cs, stat]. Mahdi Pakdaman Naeini, Gregory Cooper, and Milos Hauskrecht. Obtaining well calibrated probabilities using bayesian binning. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 29,

arXiv 1906
[1998]

Kimin Lee, Honglak Lee, Kibok Lee, and Jinwoo Shin

doi: 10.1109/5.726791. Kimin Lee, Honglak Lee, Kibok Lee, and Jinwoo Shin. Training confidence-calibrated classifiers for detecting out-of-distribution samples. In International Conference on Learning Representations,

doi:10.1109/5.726791
[2002]

doi: 10.1 162/089976602753284446

ISSN 0899-7667. doi: 10.1 162/089976602753284446. URL https://doi.or g/10.1162/089976602753284446. David W Scott. Multivariate density estimation: theory, practice, and visualization. John Wiley & Sons,

doi:10.1162/089976602753284446

Show all 18 references

[2009]

doi: 10.1 109/CVPR.2009.5206848. Alexey Dosovitskiy, Lucas Beyer, Alexander Kolesnikov, Dirk Weissenborn, Xiaohua Zhai, Thomas Unterthiner, Mostafa Dehghani, Matthias Minderer, Georg Heigold, Sylvain Gelly, Jakob Uszkoreit, and Neil Houlsby. An image is worth 16x16 words: Tran...

2009
[2015]

Weinberger

Gao Huang, Zhuang Liu, Laurens Van Der Maaten, and Kilian Q. Weinberger. Densely Connected Convolutional Networks . In 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 2261–2269, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, July

2017
[2016]

Xingyu Tan, Xiaoyang Wang, Qing Liu, Xiwei Xu, Xin Yuan, and Wenjie Zhang

doi: 10.1109/CVPR.2016.308. Xingyu Tan, Xiaoyang Wang, Qing Liu, Xiwei Xu, Xin Yuan, and Wenjie Zhang. Paths-over-graph: Knowledge graph empowered large language model reasoning. In Proceedings of the ACM on Web Conference 2025, pages 3505–3522,

2016 doi
[2017]

Geoffrey Hinton

URL https://openreview.n et/forum?id=Hkg4TI9xl. Geoffrey Hinton. Distilling the knowledge in a neural net- work. arXiv preprint arXiv:1503.02531,

arXiv
[2019]

URL https://papers.nips.cc/pap er_files/paper/2019/hash/f8c0c968632 845cd133308b1a494967f-Abstract.html. Y . Lecun, L. Bottou, Y . Bengio, and P. Haffner. Gradient- based learning applied to document recognition. Pro- ceedings of the IEEE , 86(11):2278–2324,

2019
[2020]

arXiv:1904.01685 [cs, stat]

URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1904.01685 . arXiv:1904.01685 [cs, stat]. Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Francisco Massa, Adam Lerer, James Bradbury, Gregory Chanan, Trevor Killeen, Zem- ing Lin, Natalia Gimelshein, Luca Antiga, et al. Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep lea...

1904 arXiv
[2021]

arXiv:2006.12800 [cs, stat]

URL http://arxiv.org/abs/ 2006.12800. arXiv:2006.12800 [cs, stat]. Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 770–778,

2006 arXiv
[2022]

arXiv:2006.12807 [cs, stat]

URL http://ar xiv.org/abs/2006.12807. arXiv:2006.12807 [cs, stat]. Marco Saerens, Patrice Latinne, and Christine Decaestecker. Adjusting the Outputs of a Classifier to New a Priori Probabilities: A Simple Procedure. Neural Computation, 14(1):21–41, January

2006 arXiv
[2023]

Parameterized Temperature Scaling for Boosting the Ex- pressive Power in Post-Hoc Uncertainty Calibration

Christian Tomani, Daniel Cremers, and Florian Buettner. Parameterized Temperature Scaling for Boosting the Ex- pressive Power in Post-Hoc Uncertainty Calibration. In European Conference on Computer Vision – ECCV 2022, pages 555–569, Cham,

2022
[2024]

Imagenet: A large-scale hierarchical image database

Jia Deng, Wei Dong, Richard Socher, Li-Jia Li, Kai Li, and Li Fei-Fei. Imagenet: A large-scale hierarchical image database. In 2009 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 248–255,

2009

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Then by using the chain rule we have the gradient vector of L w.r.t. B described as in Equation 7 A.1.2 MCCT-I For the calibration map described in the Theorem 2 we have f (Z) = S(Z) W + b (8) We can see that the ∂L ∂B is the same as the first calibration map. ∂f (Z) ∂W = − S(Z) W 2 (9) Equation 9 describes the gradient of f (Z) w.r.t. W . ∂L ∂W = ∂L ∂f (...

work page 2019

[2] [6]

doi: 10.1109/CVPR.2017.243

IEEE Computer Society. doi: 10.1109/CVPR.2017.243. URL https://doi. ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/CVPR .2017.243. Dieter Kraft. A software package for sequential quadratic programming. Forschungsbericht- Deutsche Forschungs- und Versuchsanstalt fur Luft- und Raumfahrt,

doi:10.1109/cvpr.2017.243 2017

[3] [13]

Rethinking the inception ar- chitecture for computer vision

Christian Szegedy, Vincent Vanhoucke, Sergey Ioffe, Jon Shlens, and Zbigniew Wojna. Rethinking the inception ar- chitecture for computer vision. In 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages 2818–2826,

work page 2016

[4] [16]

Wide residual networks

Sergey Zagoruyko. Wide residual networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1605.07146,

arXiv

[5] [17]

Revisit Time Series Classification Benchmark: The Impact of Temporal Information for Classification

URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v119/z hang20k.html. ISSN: 2640-3498. Yunrui Zhang, Gustavo Batista, and Salii S Kanhere. Label shift estimation with incremental prior update. In Pro- ceedings of the 2025 SIAM International Conference on Data Mining (SDM), pages 134–142. SIAM, 2025a. Yunrui Zhang, Gustavo Batista, and Salil S Kanhere. Re- visit time ser...

work page Pith review arXiv 2025

[6] [29]

Mahdi Pakdaman Naeini, Gregory Cooper, and Milos Hauskrecht

arXiv:1906.02629 [cs, stat]. Mahdi Pakdaman Naeini, Gregory Cooper, and Milos Hauskrecht. Obtaining well calibrated probabilities using bayesian binning. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 29,

arXiv 1906

[7] [1998]

Kimin Lee, Honglak Lee, Kibok Lee, and Jinwoo Shin

doi: 10.1109/5.726791. Kimin Lee, Honglak Lee, Kibok Lee, and Jinwoo Shin. Training confidence-calibrated classifiers for detecting out-of-distribution samples. In International Conference on Learning Representations,

doi:10.1109/5.726791

[8] [2002]

doi: 10.1 162/089976602753284446

ISSN 0899-7667. doi: 10.1 162/089976602753284446. URL https://doi.or g/10.1162/089976602753284446. David W Scott. Multivariate density estimation: theory, practice, and visualization. John Wiley & Sons,

doi:10.1162/089976602753284446