Kornelius Raeth 1 Nicole Ludwig 1 2 Abstractscoring rules distribute the training gradient in proportion to Sample-based generative models are increasingly data density, with no awareness of the decision maker's cost structure. The model's limited capacity is allocated globused for probabilistic forecasting in high-stakes ally, leaving decision-critical regions of the output space decision settings, yet their training objectives are potentially underserved. These models are commonly trained with strictly proper Given a forecast, a decision maker with cost function c(a,y), scoring rules, such as the energy score, which al-of action aand outcome y, selects the action that minimises locate their training signal in proportion to dataexpected cost under the forecast distribution; a point forecast density, with no awareness of where forecast eris insufficient to evaluate this expectation. A good forecast rors are most costly for downstream decisions. Crucially, the energy score objective with a differentiable deci-observed cost of the optimal action is itself a proper scoring sion loss that directly penalises the cost incurredrule (Hartline et al., 2025; Kleinberg et al., 2023), placing by acting on the model's forecast. This combinedit in the same family as the energy score which licenses loss is theoretically grounded, as the decision losstheir combination as a theoretically well-founded training is itself a proper scoring rule. Introduction score acts as that anchor, preventing the model from collapsing outside cost-sensitive regions. Our method is theo-tion based on a temperature forecast, balancing asset loss against the cost of intervention. In the weather domain, retically grounded and leads to better downstream decisions state-of-the-art forecasting systems (Lang et al., 2024; Pricewhile retaining full probabilistic forecasts, as validated on et al., 2023) are trained with strictly proper scoring rulessynthetic and real-world forecasting tasks. A gradient analysis showing which regions benefitscore reduces to the continuous ranked probability score from the decision loss and why, based on the cost (CRPS), widely used in meteorological forecast verificafunction structure. Both model classes introduced above are commonly trained by minimising strictly proper sion calibration.

This work examines risk bounds for nonparametric distributional regression estimators. For convex-constrained distributional regression, general upper bounds are established for the continuous ranked probability score (CRPS) and the worst-case mean squared error (MSE) across the domain. These theoretical results are applied to isotonic and trend filtering distributional regression, yielding convergence rates consistent with those for mean estimation. Furthermore, a general upper bound is derived for distributional regression under non-convex constraints, with a specific application to neural network-based estimators.

Two dominant approaches have emerged for generating probabilistic forecasts of physical systems: generative models, such as diffusion or flow matching; and ensembles of deterministic models with stochasticity injected, trained using the continuous ranked probability score (CRPS) loss. While both approaches have demonstrated strong predictive accuracy, the reliability of their uncertainties has not been systematically assessed. We address this gap by developing a framework to evaluate both approaches across diverse 2D spatiotemporal physical systems, under matched model size and computational budget. We assess the reliability of probabilistic emulation by inspecting the empirical coverage of predictive intervals, while also considering accuracy and computational efficiency metrics. CRPS-trained ensembles typically achieve more reliable uncertainties on both single-step prediction and autoregressive rollouts, demonstrating better coverage than the standard alternative of training generative models in a latent space. Moreover, the CRPS approach offers significantly faster inference. When generative models are trained in ambient rather than a compressed latent space, which is often infeasible for high-dimensional problems, they exhibit comparable coverage to CRPS-trained ensembles, though with substantially larger inference latency. In contrast, when CRPS-trained ensembles are trained in latent space they do not show a marked degradation in coverage with respect to ambient space. Both generative models and CRPS-trained ensembles demonstrate good predictive accuracy. To facilitate future research and application, we release AutoCast, a modular framework implementing both generative models and CRPS-trained ensembles, alongside AutoSim, a flexible dataset generation package for rapid prototyping.

We propose Conformal Seasonal Pools (CSP), a training-free probabilistic time-series forecaster that mixes same-season empirical draws with signed residual draws around a seasonal naive forecast. In an audited rolling-origin benchmark on the six time-series datasets where DeepNPTS was originally evaluated (electricity, exchange_rate, solar_energy, taxi, traffic, wikipedia), CSP-Adaptive significantly outperforms DeepNPTS on every metric we report -- CRPS (per-window paired Wilcoxon $p \approx 4 \times 10^{-10}$), normalized mean quantile loss ($p \approx 7 \times 10^{-10}$), and empirical 95% coverage ($p \approx 8 \times 10^{-45}$, mean 0.89 vs 0.66) -- while running over 500x faster on CPU. Coverage is the most decision-critical of these: a 0.95 nominal interval that contains the truth in only ~66% of cases fails the basic calibration desideratum and would not survive deployment in safety- or decision-critical settings. The failure mode is also more severe than aggregate coverage suggests: in the worst 10% of windows, DeepNPTS's prediction interval covers none of the H forecast horizons -- the entire multi-step trajectory misses the truth at every step simultaneously. This poses serious risk in safety- and decision-critical applications such as healthcare, finance, energy operations, and autonomous systems, where prediction intervals that systematically miss the truth across the entire planning horizon translate directly into misclassified patients, regulatory capital failures, grid imbalances, and safety-case violations. CSP achieves all of this with no learned parameters and no training. We argue training-free conformal samplers should be mandatory baselines when evaluating learned non-parametric forecasters.

AI-based weather forecasting now rivals traditional physics-based ensembles, but state-of-the-art (SOTA) models rely on specialized architectures and massive computational budgets, creating a high barrier to entry. We demonstrate that such complexity is unnecessary for frontier performance. We introduce U-Cast, a probabilistic forecaster built on a standard U-Net backbone trained with a simple recipe: deterministic pre-training on Mean Absolute Error followed by short probabilistic fine-tuning on the Continuous Ranked Probability Score (CRPS) using Monte Carlo Dropout for stochasticity. As a result, our model matches or exceeds the probabilistic skill of GenCast and IFS ENS at 1.5$^\circ\$ resolution while reducing training compute by over 10$\times$ compared to leading CRPS-based models and inference latency by over 10$\times$ compared to diffusion-based models. U-Cast trains in under 12 H200 GPU-days and generates a 60-step ensemble forecast in 11 seconds. These results suggest that scalable, general-purpose architectures paired with efficient training curricula can match complex domain-specific designs at a fraction of the cost, opening the training of frontier probabilistic weather models to the broader community. Our code is available at: https://github.com/Rose-STL-Lab/u-cast.

We propose a method for non-parametric conditional distribution estimation based on partitioning covariate-sorted observations into contiguous bins and using the within-bin empirical CDF as the predictive distribution. Bin boundaries are chosen to minimise the total leave-one-out Continuous Ranked Probability Score (LOO-CRPS), which admits a closed-form cost function with $O(n^2 \log n)$ precomputation and $O(n^2)$ storage; the globally optimal $K$-partition is recovered by a dynamic programme in $O(n^2 K)$ time. Minimisation of within-sample LOO-CRPS turns out to be inappropriate for selecting $K$ as it results in in-sample optimism. We instead select $K$ by $K$-fold cross-validation of test CRPS, which yields a U-shaped criterion with a well-defined minimum. Having selected $K^*$ and fitted the full-data partition, we form two complementary predictive objects: the Venn prediction band and a conformal prediction set based on CRPS as the nonconformity score, which carries a finite-sample marginal coverage guarantee at any prescribed level $\varepsilon$. The conformal prediction is transductive and data-efficient, as all observations are used for both partitioning and p-value calculation, with no need to reserve a hold-out set. On real benchmarks against split-conformal competitors (Gaussian split conformal, CQR, CQR-QRF, and conformalized isotonic distributional regression), the method produces substantially narrower prediction intervals while maintaining near-nominal coverage.

Time-varying causal models provide a powerful framework for studying dynamic scientific systems, yet most existing approaches assume that the underlying causal network is known a priori - an assumption rarely satisfied in real-world domains where causal structure is uncertain, evolving, or only indirectly observable. This limits the applicability of dynamic causal inference in many scientific settings. We propose Dynamic Causal Network Autoregression (DCNAR), a two-stage neural causal modeling framework that integrates data-driven causal discovery with time-varying causal inference. In the first stage, a neural autoregressive causal discovery model learns a sparse directed causal network from multivariate time series. In the second stage, this learned structure is used as a structural prior for a time-varying neural network autoregression, enabling dynamic estimation of causal influence without requiring pre-specified network structure. We evaluate the scientific validity of DCNAR using behavioral diagnostics that assess causal necessity, temporal stability, and sensitivity to structural change, rather than predictive accuracy alone. Experiments on multi-country panel time-series data demonstrate that learned causal networks yield more stable and behaviorally meaningful dynamic causal inferences than coefficient-based or structure-free alternatives, even when forecasting performance is comparable. These results position DCNAR as a general framework for using AI as a scientific instrument for dynamic causal reasoning under structural uncertainty.