If you are predicting the labely of a new object withˆy, how confident are you that y = ˆy?

Finally, we want our algorithm to have low computational overhead, so that itcan be applied asawrapper on top ofarbitrary prediction methods, for both regression and classification.

The idea is to first develop a prediction model without concern for the downstream risk profile or robustness guarantee, and then utilize calibration (or recalibration) methods to quantify the uncertainty of the prediction.

The seminal work of "equalized coverage" proposed an uncertainty-aware fairness notion.

Conformal Prediction (CP) provides a statistical framework for uncertainty quantification that constructs prediction sets with coverage guarantees. While CP yields uncontrolled prediction set sizes, Backward Conformal Prediction (BCP) inverts this paradigm by enforcing a predefined upper bound on set size and estimating the resulting coverage guarantee. However, the looseness induced by Markov's inequality within the BCP framework causes a significant gap between the estimated coverage bound and the empirical coverage. In this work, we introduce ST-BCP, a novel method that introduces a data-dependent transformation of nonconformity scores to narrow the coverage gap. In particular, we develop a computable transformation and prove that it outperforms the baseline identity transformation. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our method, reducing the average coverage gap from 4.20\% to 1.12\% on common benchmarks.

One-shot prediction enables rapid adaptation of pretrained foundation models to new tasks using only one labeled example, but lacks principled uncertainty quantification. While conformal prediction provides finite-sample coverage guarantees, standard split conformal methods are inefficient in the one-shot setting due to data splitting and reliance on a single predictor. We propose Conformal Aggregation of One-Shot Predictors (CAOS), a conformal framework that adaptively aggregates multiple one-shot predictors and uses a leave-one-out calibration scheme to fully exploit scarce labeled data. Despite violating classical exchangeability assumptions, we prove that CAOS achieves valid marginal coverage using a monotonicity-based argument. Experiments on one-shot facial landmarking and RAFT text classification tasks show that CAOS produces substantially smaller prediction sets than split conformal baselines while maintaining reliable coverage.

Clinical decision-making demands uncertainty quantification that provides both distribution-free coverage guarantees and risk-adaptive precision, requirements that existing methods fail to jointly satisfy. We present a hybrid Bayesian-conformal framework that addresses this fundamental limitation in healthcare predictions. Our approach integrates Bayesian hierarchical random forests with group-aware con-formal calibration, using posterior uncertainties to weight conformity scores while maintaining rigorous coverage validity. Evaluated on 61,538 admissions across 3,793 U.S. hospitals and 4 regions, our method achieves target coverage (94.3% vs 95% target) with adaptive precision: 21% narrower intervals for low-uncertainty cases while appropriately widening for high-risk predictions. Critically, we demonstrate that well-calibrated Bayesian uncertainties alone severely under-cover (14.1%), highlighting the necessity of our hybrid approach. This framework enables risk-stratified clinical protocols, efficient resource planning for high-confidence predictions, and conservative allocation with enhanced oversight for uncertain cases, providing uncertainty-aware decision support across diverse healthcare settings.