REVIEW 1 cited by
Ensemble-based Uncertainty Quantification: Bayesian versus Credal Inference
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
read the original abstract
The idea to distinguish and quantify two important types of uncertainty, often referred to as aleatoric and epistemic, has received increasing attention in machine learning research in the last couple of years. In this paper, we consider ensemble-based approaches to uncertainty quantification. Distinguishing between different types of uncertainty-aware learning algorithms, we specifically focus on Bayesian methods and approaches based on so-called credal sets, which naturally suggest themselves from an ensemble learning point of view. For both approaches, we address the question of how to quantify aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty. The effectiveness of corresponding measures is evaluated and compared in an empirical study on classification with a reject option.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
ElemeNet: Multiscale Molecular Machine Learning with Uncertainty Quantification Across the Periodic Table
ElemeNet is a unified ML software package for molecular property prediction across elements 1-100 with built-in uncertainty quantification and competitive benchmarks on diverse chemistry datasets.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.