We introduce Heptapod, an image autoregressive model that adheres to the foundational principles of language modeling. Heptapod employs \textbf{causal attention}, \textbf{eliminates reliance on CFG}, and \textbf{eschews the trend of semantic tokenizers}. Our key innovation is \textit{next 2D distribution prediction}: a causal Transformer with reconstruction-focused visual tokenizer, learns to predict the distribution over the entire 2D spatial grid of images at each timestep. This learning objective unifies the sequential modeling of autoregressive framework with the holistic self-supervised learning of masked autoencoding, enabling the model to capture comprehensive image semantics via generative training. On the ImageNet generation benchmark, Heptapod achieves an FID of $2.70$, significantly outperforming previous causal autoregressive approaches. We hope our work inspires a principled rethinking of language modeling on visual signals and beyond.

Uncertainty estimates must be calibrated (i.e., accurate) and sharp (i.e., informative) in order to be useful. This has motivated a variety of methods for recalibration, which use held-out data to turn an uncalibrated model into a calibrated model. However, the applicability of existing methods is limited due to their assumption that the original model is also a probabilistic model. We introduce a versatile class of algorithms for recalibration in regression that we call Modular Conformal Calibration (MCC). This framework allows one to transform any regression model into a calibrated probabilistic model. The modular design of MCC allows us to make simple adjustments to existing algorithms that enable well-behaved distribution predictions. We also provide finite-sample calibration guarantees for MCC algorithms. Our framework recovers isotonic recalibration, conformal calibration, and conformal interval prediction, implying that our theoretical results apply to those methods as well. Finally, we conduct an empirical study of MCC on 17 regression datasets. Our results show that new algorithms designed in our framework achieve near-perfect calibration and improve sharpness relative to existing methods.

In this paper we consider how to evaluate survival distribution predictions with measures of discrimination. This is a non-trivial problem as discrimination measures are the most commonly used in survival analysis and yet there is no clear method to derive a risk prediction from a distribution prediction. We survey methods proposed in literature and software and consider their respective advantages and disadvantages. Whilst distributions are frequently evaluated by discrimination measures, we find that the method for doing so is rarely described in the literature and often leads to unfair comparisons. We find that the most robust method of reducing a distribution to a risk is to sum over the predicted cumulative hazard. We recommend that machine learning survival analysis software implements clear transformations between distribution and risk predictions in order to allow more transparent and accessible model evaluation.