Effective medication management in Parkinson's Disease (PD) is challenging due to heterogeneous disease progression, variable patient response, and medication side effects. While AI models can forecast levodopa equivalent daily dose (LEDD) as a measure of medication needs, standard uncertainty quantification often fails to communicate the reliability of these predictions, treating high and low confidence clinical decisions identically. We introduce CASCADE (Calibrated Adaptive Scaling via Conformal And Distributional Estimation), a novel conformal prediction framework that propagates epistemic uncertainty from a screening classifier to adapt downstream predictions. Unlike standard conformal methods that rely on auxiliary residual regression, we leverage epistemic uncertainty from a primary classification task (identifying whether a medication change is needed) to dynamically scale the prediction intervals of a secondary regression task (predicting how much change). By mapping Venn-Abers multi-probabilistic uncertainty directly to non-conformity scores, our framework achieves continuous risk adaptation. We demonstrate that this ``cascade effect'' produces highly efficient intervals for confident patients (38.9% narrower than standard conformal baselines) while automatically expanding intervals to ensure robust coverage for uncertain cases, bridging the gap between discrete clinical decision-making and continuous dose forecasting in PD.

We develop a skew-adaptive extension of split conformal prediction for regression. The method starts from an asymmetric interval family centered at a point prediction and uses the gauge approach to deduce the conformity score induced by this family. The inverse hyperbolic sine transform of signed scaled residuals provides the training target for an additional predictive model, whose role is to learn how predictive uncertainty should tilt across the feature space. The resulting procedure preserves the finite-sample marginal validity of split conformal prediction under exchangeability, while producing intervals that adapt to both local scale and local skewness. We also develop a calibration-sample-based estimator for comparing the expected relative future width of the skew-adaptive and classical scaled-score intervals. Experiments on a variety of datasets indicate gains in prediction interval efficiency over the scaled-score construction and conformalized quantile regression, and show that the proposed estimator closely matches the corresponding average width ratio observed on the test sample.

High-fidelity (HF) data are often expensive to collect and therefore scarce, making conditional quantiles difficult to estimate accurately. We propose a two-stage, model-agnostic method for multi-fidelity quantile regression. The central idea is a local quantile link: at each covariate value, the HF quantile is represented as a low-fidelity (LF) quantile evaluated at a covariate-dependent level. This reformulation reduces the problem to estimating the level function, which can be smoother than the HF quantile itself when the LF and HF conditional distributions have similar shapes. We also study the complementary regime in which this advantage weakens and introduce a correction step to improve robustness. Our theory characterizes when the proposed estimator converges faster than direct quantile regression using HF data alone and when the correction step provides further improvement. Experiments on synthetic and real data show that our method yields more accurate quantile estimates and tighter conformal prediction intervals.

Conformal prediction provides distribution-free predictive intervals with finite-sample marginal coverage. However, achieving conditional validity and interval efficiency (in terms of short interval length) remains challenging, particularly in complex settings with heteroskedasticity, skewed responses, or estimation errors. We propose a conformal-style calibration method for responses obtained by the probability integral transform (PIT) of the conditional cumulative distribution function (CDF) estimated via neural networks to construct a finite-sample-adjusted percentile interval with the shortest length determined by the estimated conditional CDF. Calibrating in PIT space is effective because PIT values are asymptotically feature-independent when the CDF estimator is accurate, which mitigates feature-dependent miscoverage and improves conditional calibration. On the other hand, our percentile calibration adapts to the empirical PIT distribution, which is robust against a possibly imperfect estimation of the conditional CDF. We prove the finite-sample marginal coverage property of the proposed method and show its asymptotic conditional coverage under mild consistency conditions. Experiments on diverse synthetic and real-world benchmarks demonstrate better conditional calibration and substantially shorter intervals than existing methods.

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.

This paper develops a conformal method to compute prediction intervals for nonparametric regression that can automatically adapt to skewed data. Leveraging black-box machine learning algorithms to estimate the conditional distribution of the outcome using histograms, it translates their output into the shortest prediction intervals with approximate conditional coverage. The resulting prediction intervals provably have marginal coverage in finite samples, while asymptotically achieving conditional coverage and optimal length if the black-box model is consistent. Numerical experiments with simulated and real data demonstrate improved performance compared to state-of-the-art alternatives, including conformalized quantile regression and other distributional conformal prediction approaches.

We study split-conformal prediction for regression when the reported prediction set must be a single interval, at target marginal coverage $1-α$, where $α$ is the nominal miscoverage level. Under this reporting constraint, the natural conditional target is the shortest interval with conditional mass at least $1-α$, rather than an equal-tailed interval or a possibly disconnected high-probability set. We parameterize this single-interval oracle by a lower-tail allocation, which determines how the nominal miscoverage $α$ is split between the two endpoints, and propose tail-allocation conformalized quantile regression (TA-CQR). TA-CQR estimates this allocation by searching over quantile-defined cores and then applies nonnegative additive split-conformal calibration, retaining exact finite-sample marginal coverage under exchangeability. The main contribution is theoretical. We characterize the oracle geometry, including its highest-density interpretation under unimodality and the positive connectedness cost induced by disconnected highest-density sets. We prove local recovery of the selected allocation and core, establish that calibration radii are asymptotically negligible under endpoint-density conditions, and give a finite-sample calibrated length oracle inequality with explicit grid, endpoint-quantile estimation, and calibration-sampling terms. Simulations and real-data examples report coverage and length jointly.

Crucial for building trust in deep learning models for critical real-world applications is efficient and theoretically sound uncertainty quantification, a task that continues to be challenging. Useful uncertainty information is expected to have two key properties: It should be valid (guaranteeing coverage) and discriminative (more uncertain when the expected risk is high). Moreover, when combined with deep learning (DL) methods, it should be scalable and affect the DL model performance minimally. Most existing Bayesian methods lack frequentist coverage guarantees and usually affect model performance. The few available frequentist methods are rarely discriminative and/or violate coverage guarantees due to unrealistic assumptions. Moreover, many methods are expensive or require substantial modifications to the base neural network. Building upon recent advances in conformal prediction [13, 33] and leveraging the classical idea of kernel regression, we propose Locally Valid and Discriminative prediction intervals (LVD), a simple, efficient and lightweight method to construct discriminative prediction intervals (PIs) for almost any DL model. With no assumptions on the data distribution, such PIs also offer finite-sample local coverage guarantees (contrasted to the simpler marginal coverage). We empirically verify, using diverse datasets, that besides being the only locally valid method for DL, LVD also exceeds or matches the performance (including coverage rate and prediction accuracy) of existing uncertainty quantification methods, while offering additional benefits in scalability and flexibility.