Han Zhou, Teodora Popordanoska, Matthew Blaschkocs.LG
As deep learning models are increasingly deployed in high-stakes applications, providing well-calibrated uncertainty estimates has become as critical as achieving high predictive accuracy. While Kernel Density Estimation (KDE) has emerged as a smooth and continuous alternative to traditional binning for quantifying miscalibration, its reliability is heavily dependent on the choice of the kernel bandwidth. Standard selection techniques, such as Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE), often fail to produce optimal bandwidths for calibration tasks. In this work, we introduce Risk Alignment (RA), a novel optimization framework that determines the optimal bandwidth by aligning KDE-reconstructed risk with empirical risk. We theoretically demonstrate that this alignment minimizes calibration estimation bias across the data distribution, establishing a principled bandwidth selection criterion applicable to various metrics, including the challenging case of canonical calibration error. Extensive experiments across multiple architectures and datasets show that RA consistently outperforms standard bandwidth selection methods, yielding more reliable calibration assessments.
The main goal in regression modelling consists in approximating the conditional mean of a response given a set of features. A regression function is said to be calibrated if the resulting mean estimates match the true conditional means for almost every set of features. Aiming for calibration seems not achievable in practice as one typically deals with finite samples of noisy observations. A weaker notion of calibration is auto-calibration, and it means that the expectation of responses being given the same mean estimate matches this estimate. This notion is important, e.g., in insurance pricing as it ensures no cross-subsidization between different price cohorts. In this paper, we show that boosting trees can be used to test necessary conditions for calibration and auto-calibration, respectively. The practical relevance of our approach is supported by a numerical example, in which the proposed tests prove to be very powerful on a large insurance dataset.
Performance estimation under distribution shift aims to predict how a model behaves on an unlabeled test set whose distribution differs from the training data, a scenario that requires reliable indicators that can faithfully reflect model behavior without ground-truth labels. Existing approaches rely solely on the outputs of the given model whose biases are amplified once the distribution shifts, weakening the correlation with the true performance. Motivated by this limitation, we propose Fused Reference Alignment Prediction (FRAP), which leverages the complementary strengths of an external foundation model and the base model to construct a more reliable surrogate of the ground-truth labels. FRAP aligns the prediction distribution of the foundation model with that of the base model by applying temperature-scaled calibration that minimizes their divergence. The aligned predictions are fused through confidence-based weighting into a refined reference distribution that integrates robustness from the foundation model and domain-specific expertise from the base model, and performance estimation is obtained by measuring how closely the base model predictions agree with this reference. Extensive experiments across diverse datasets and architectures show that FRAP provides consistent and substantial improvements over representative performance-estimation methods under distribution shift.