The distance from calibration, introduced by Błasiok, Gopalan, Hu, and Nakkiran (STOC 2023), has recently emerged as a central measure of miscalibration for probabilistic predictors. We study the fundamental problems of computing and estimating this quantity, given either an exact description of the data distribution or only sample access to it. We give an efficient algorithm that exactly computes the calibration distance when the distribution has a uniform marginal and noiseless labels, which improves the $O(1/\sqrt{|\mathcal{X}|})$ additive approximation of Qiao and Zheng (COLT 2024) for this special case. Perhaps surprisingly, the problem becomes $\mathsf{NP}$-hard when either of the two assumptions is removed. We extend our algorithm to a polynomial-time approximation scheme for the general case. For the estimation problem, we show that $Θ(1/ε^3)$ samples are sufficient and necessary for the empirical calibration distance to be upper bounded by the true distance plus $ε$. In contrast, a polynomial dependence on the domain size -- incurred by the learning-based baseline -- is unavoidable for two-sided estimation. Our positive results are based on simple sparsifications of both the distribution and the target predictor, which significantly reduce the search space for computation and lead to stronger concentration for the estimation problem. To prove the hardness results, we introduce new techniques for certifying lower bounds on the calibration distance -- a problem that is hard in general due to its $\textsf{co-NP}$-completeness.

In the recent literature on machine learning and decision making, calibration has emerged as a desirable and widely-studied statistical property of the outputs of binary prediction models. However, the algorithmic aspects of measuring model calibration have remained relatively less well-explored. Motivated by [BGHN23], which proposed a rigorous framework for measuring distances to calibration, we initiate the algorithmic study of calibration through the lens of property testing. We define the problem of calibration testing from samples where given $n$ draws from a distribution $\mathcal{D}$ on (predictions, binary outcomes), our goal is to distinguish between the case where $\mathcal{D}$ is perfectly calibrated, and the case where $\mathcal{D}$ is $\varepsilon$-far from calibration. We design an algorithm based on approximate linear programming, which solves calibration testing information-theoretically optimally (up to constant factors) in time $O(n^{1.5} \log(n))$. This improves upon state-of-the-art black-box linear program solvers requiring $\Omega(n^\omega)$ time, where $\omega > 2$ is the exponent of matrix multiplication. We also develop algorithms for tolerant variants of our testing problem, and give sample complexity lower bounds for alternative calibration distances to the one considered in this work. Finally, we present preliminary experiments showing that the testing problem we define faithfully captures standard notions of calibration, and that our algorithms scale to accommodate moderate sample sizes.

We study a sequential binary prediction setting where the forecaster is evaluated in terms of the calibration distance, which is defined as the $L_1$ distance between the predicted values and the set of predictions that are perfectly calibrated in hindsight. This is analogous to a calibration measure recently proposed by B{\l}asiok, Gopalan, Hu and Nakkiran (STOC 2023) for the offline setting. The calibration distance is a natural and intuitive measure of deviation from perfect calibration, and satisfies a Lipschitz continuity property which does not hold for many popular calibration measures, such as the $L_1$ calibration error and its variants. We prove that there is a forecasting algorithm that achieves an $O(\sqrt{T})$ calibration distance in expectation on an adversarially chosen sequence of $T$ binary outcomes. At the core of this upper bound is a structural result showing that the calibration distance is accurately approximated by the lower calibration distance, which is a continuous relaxation of the former. We then show that an $O(\sqrt{T})$ lower calibration distance can be achieved via a simple minimax argument and a reduction to online learning on a Lipschitz class. On the lower bound side, an $\Omega(T^{1/3})$ calibration distance is shown to be unavoidable, even when the adversary outputs a sequence of independent random bits, and has an additional ability to early stop (i.e., to stop producing random bits and output the same bit in the remaining steps). Interestingly, without this early stopping, the forecaster can achieve a much smaller calibration distance of $\mathrm{polylog}(T)$.