In selective classification (SC), a classifier abstains from making predictions that are likely to be wrong to avoid excessive errors. To deploy imperfect classifiers -- imperfect either due to intrinsic statistical noise of data or for robustness issue of the classifier or beyond -- in high-stakes scenarios, SC appears to be an attractive and necessary path to follow. Despite decades of research in SC, most previous SC methods still focus on the ideal statistical setting only, i.e., the data distribution at deployment is the same as that of training, although practical data can come from the wild. To bridge this gap, in this paper, we propose an SC framework that takes into account distribution shifts, termed generalized selective classification, that covers label-shifted (or out-of-distribution) and covariate-shifted samples, in addition to typical in-distribution samples, the first of its kind in the SC literature. We focus on non-training-based confidence-score functions for generalized SC on deep learning (DL) classifiers and propose two novel margin-based score functions. Through extensive analysis and experiments, we show that our proposed score functions are more effective and reliable than the existing ones for generalized SC on a variety of classification tasks and DL classifiers.

Focusing on short term trend prediction in a financial context, we consider the problem of selective prediction whereby the predictor can abstain from prediction in order to improve performance. We examine two types of selective mechanisms for HMM predictors. The first is a rejection in the spirit of Chow's well-known ambiguity principle. The second is a specialized mechanism for HMMs that identifies low quality HMM states and abstain from prediction in those states. We call this model selective HMM (sHMM). In both approaches we can trade-off prediction coverage to gain better accuracy in a controlled manner. We compare performance of the ambiguity-based rejection technique with that of the sHMM approach. Our results indicate that both methods are effective, and that the sHMM model is superior.

Deep neural networks (DNNs) have proven to be powerful predictors and are widely used for various tasks. Credible uncertainty estimation of their predictions, however, is crucial for their deployment in many risk-sensitive applications. In this paper we present a novel and simple attack, which unlike adversarial attacks, does not cause incorrect predictions but instead cripples the network's capacity for uncertainty estimation. The result is that after the attack, the DNN is more confident of its incorrect predictions than about its correct ones without having its accuracy reduced. We present two versions of the attack. The first scenario focuses on a black-box regime (where the attacker has no knowledge of the target network) and the second scenario attacks a white-box setting. The proposed attack is only required to be of minuscule magnitude for its perturbations to cause severe uncertainty estimation damage, with larger magnitudes resulting in completely unusable uncertainty estimations. We demonstrate successful attacks on three of the most popular uncertainty estimation methods: the vanilla softmax score, Deep Ensembles and MC-Dropout. Additionally, we show an attack on SelectiveNet, the selective classification architecture. We test the proposed attack on several contemporary architectures such as MobileNetV2 and EfficientNetB0, all trained to classify ImageNet.

Focusing on short term trend prediction in a financial context, we consider the problem of selective prediction whereby the predictor can abstain from prediction in order to improve performance. We examine two types of selective mechanisms for HMM predictors. The first is a rejection in the spirit of Chow’s well-known ambiguity principle. The second is a specialized mechanism for HMMs that identifies low quality HMM states and abstain from prediction in those states. We call this model selective HMM (sHMM). In both approaches we can trade-off prediction coverage to gain better accuracy in a controlled manner. We compare performance of the ambiguity-based rejection technique with that of the sHMM approach. Our results indicate that both methods are effective, and that the sHMM model is superior.