REVIEW 7 cited by
Quantifying Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty with Proper Scoring Rules
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
Quantifying Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty with Proper Scoring Rules
read the original abstract
Uncertainty representation and quantification are paramount in machine learning and constitute an important prerequisite for safety-critical applications. In this paper, we propose novel measures for the quantification of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty based on proper scoring rules, which are loss functions with the meaningful property that they incentivize the learner to predict ground-truth (conditional) probabilities. We assume two common representations of (epistemic) uncertainty, namely, in terms of a credal set, i.e. a set of probability distributions, or a second-order distribution, i.e., a distribution over probability distributions. Our framework establishes a natural bridge between these representations. We provide a formal justification of our approach and introduce new measures of epistemic and aleatoric uncertainty as concrete instantiations.
Forward citations
Cited by 7 Pith papers
-
Relative Entropy-Bounded Ambiguous Chance Constraints for Robust Planning in Nonlinear Systems
A relative-entropy ambiguity set with a Donsker–Varadhan bound, plus a quadratic-truncation-based estimate of its radius, yields a distributionally robust risk upper bound for nonlinear covariance steering.
-
Subjective Risk Decomposition: A New View for Uncertainty Quantification
Most existing epistemic/aleatoric uncertainty measures are special cases of one bias-variance-entropy decomposition of subjective risk under a strictly proper loss.
-
Evaluating Epistemic Uncertainty: Beyond OOD Detection and Active Learning
Epistemic uncertainty should be judged by how well it ranks reducible error, and a new Pareto-gap diagnostic shows proxy-task rankings can invert.
-
The Clinician's Veto: Navigating Trust, Liability, and Uncertainty in Autonomous AI Prescribing
A survey of 136 U.S. clinicians finds that autonomous AI prescribing would require confidence-based escalation, differentiated uncertainty communication, and inferential transparency to gain acceptance and properly al...
-
Uncertainty Quantification for Regression: A Unified Framework based on kernel scores
Kernel-score divergences define a unified family of regression uncertainty measures whose kernel choice controls robustness, tail sensitivity, and OOD responsiveness.
-
Rethinking Uncertainty Estimation in LLMs: A Principled Single-Sequence Measure
Negative log-likelihood of the greedy-decoded most likely sequence (G-NLL) is a principled single-sequence uncertainty measure for LLMs that achieves state-of-the-art results.
-
Methods for Uncertainty Representation in Risk Management: A Comparative Review and Decision-Oriented Framework
Systematic review of 370 publications classifies uncertainty representation in risk management into probabilistic, evidence-based/fuzzy, qualitative, graphical, and hybrid families, noting limited practical integration.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.