Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Conditional Conformal Risk Adaptation

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 2504.07611 v1 pith:VNYCJPE5 submitted 2025-04-10 cs.LG

Conditional Conformal Risk Adaptation

classification cs.LG
keywords riskconformalcontrolsegmentationconditionaladaptationcalibratedimages
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Uncertainty quantification is becoming increasingly important in image segmentation, especially for high-stakes applications like medical imaging. While conformal risk control generalizes conformal prediction beyond standard miscoverage to handle various loss functions such as false negative rate, its application to segmentation often yields inadequate conditional risk control: some images experience very high false negative rates while others have negligibly small ones. We develop Conformal Risk Adaptation (CRA), which introduces a new score function for creating adaptive prediction sets that significantly improve conditional risk control for segmentation tasks. We establish a novel theoretical framework that demonstrates a fundamental connection between conformal risk control and conformal prediction through a weighted quantile approach, applicable to any score function. To address the challenge of poorly calibrated probabilities in segmentation models, we introduce a specialized probability calibration framework that enhances the reliability of pixel-wise inclusion estimates. Using these calibrated probabilities, we propose Calibrated Conformal Risk Adaptation (CCRA) and a stratified variant (CCRA-S) that partitions images based on their characteristics and applies group-specific thresholds to further enhance conditional risk control. Our experiments on polyp segmentation demonstrate that all three methods (CRA, CCRA, and CCRA-S) provide valid marginal risk control and deliver more consistent conditional risk control across diverse images compared to standard approaches, offering a principled approach to uncertainty quantification that is particularly valuable for high-stakes and personalized segmentation applications.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. When Average Calibration Fails: Site-Conditional Federated Conformal Risk Control

    cs.LG 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    A shrinkage-regularized federated CRC protocol using empirical risk curves reduces per-site coverage violations to 2.7/20 while limiting prediction-set inflation to 2.0x on 20-institution brain tumor data.

  2. Certified Domain Consistency for Multi-Domain Retrieval: Label-Free Per-Domain Contamination Control with Conformal Risk Guarantees

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    C3R certifies per-domain retrieval contamination budgets using a two-split conformal scheme, without query-time domain labels.

  3. When Average Calibration Fails: Site-Conditional Federated Conformal Risk Control

    cs.LG 2026-06 conditional novelty 5.0

    Pooled conformal calibration in federated medical segmentation can miss its target at 40% of sites; blending site-level and global risk curves with a tuned prior restores per-site coverage at 2.0x prediction-set stretch.