REVIEW 1 cited by
Is Epistemic Uncertainty Faithfully Represented by Evidential Deep Learning Methods?
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
Trustworthy ML systems should not only return accurate predictions, but also a reliable representation of their uncertainty. Bayesian methods are commonly used to quantify both aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty, but alternative approaches, such as evidential deep learning methods, have become popular in recent years. The latter group of methods in essence extends empirical risk minimization (ERM) for predicting second-order probability distributions over outcomes, from which measures of epistemic (and aleatoric) uncertainty can be extracted. This paper presents novel theoretical insights of evidential deep learning, highlighting the difficulties in optimizing second-order loss functions and interpreting the resulting epistemic uncertainty measures. With a systematic setup that covers a wide range of approaches for classification, regression and counts, it provides novel insights into issues of identifiability and convergence in second-order loss minimization, and the relative (rather than absolute) nature of epistemic uncertainty measures.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Principled Input-Output-Conditioned Post-Hoc Uncertainty Estimation for Regression Networks
IO-CUE trains a small auxiliary network on (input, frozen output) pairs with a detached Gaussian NLL objective to estimate prediction variance post-hoc, with augmented probe data improving OOD detection.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.