REVIEW 2 cited by
Rethinking Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty
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 ideas of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty are widely used to reason about the probabilistic predictions of machine-learning models. We identify incoherence in existing discussions of these ideas and suggest this stems from the aleatoric-epistemic view being insufficiently expressive to capture all the distinct quantities that researchers are interested in. To address this we present a decision-theoretic perspective that relates rigorous notions of uncertainty, predictive performance and statistical dispersion in data. This serves to support clearer thinking as the field moves forward. Additionally we provide insights into popular information-theoretic quantities, showing they can be poor estimators of what they are often purported to measure, while also explaining how they can still be useful in guiding data acquisition.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Why Does the Future Branch? Identifiable Closure Tests for Stochastic Physical World Models
ClosurePairs uses paired microstate and disturbance interventions with variance decomposition to identify whether future branching is caused by state aliasing or process noise, which ordinary prediction scores cannot.
-
Extending Epistemic Uncertainty Beyond Parameters Would Assist in Designing Reliable LLMs
Bayesian Modeling of Experiments is proposed as a unifying framework for quantifying and reducing the many sources of uncertainty in LLM deployments, beyond abstention.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.