Given Assumptions 1-4 in Giordanoetal.

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/

This paper introduces inductive randomness predictors, which form a superset of inductive conformal predictors. Its focus is on a very simple special case, binary inductive randomness predictors. It is interesting that binary inductive randomness predictors have an advantage over inductive conformal predictors, although they also have a serious disadvantage. This advantage will allow us to reach the surprising conclusion that non-trivial inductive conformal predictors are inadmissible in the sense of statistical decision theory.

We present a novel approach for test-time adaptation via online self-training, consisting of two components. First, we introduce a statistical framework that detects distribution shifts in the classifier's entropy values obtained on a stream of unlabeled samples. Second, we devise an online adaptation mechanism that utilizes the evidence of distribution shifts captured by the detection tool to dynamically update the classifier's parameters. The resulting adaptation process drives the distribution of test entropy values obtained from the self-trained classifier to match those of the source domain, building invariance to distribution shifts. This approach departs from the conventional self-training method, which focuses on minimizing the classifier's entropy. Our approach combines concepts in betting martingales and online learning to form a detection tool capable of quickly reacting to distribution shifts. We then reveal a tight relation between our adaptation scheme and optimal transport, which forms the basis of our novel self-supervised loss. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach improves test-time accuracy under distribution shifts while maintaining accuracy and calibration in their absence, outperforming leading entropy minimization methods across various scenarios.

As a natural extension to the standard conformal prediction method, several conformal risk control methods have been recently developed and applied to various learning problems. In this work, we seek to control the conformal risk in expectation for ordinal classification tasks, which have broad applications to many real problems. For this purpose, we firstly formulated the ordinal classification task in the conformal risk control framework, and provided theoretic risk bounds of the risk control method. Then we proposed two types of loss functions specially designed for ordinal classification tasks, and developed corresponding algorithms to determine the prediction set for each case to control their risks at a desired level. We demonstrated the effectiveness of our proposed methods, and analyzed the difference between the two types of risks on three different datasets, including a simulated dataset, the UTKFace dataset and the diabetic retinopathy detection dataset.

This paper studies theoretically and empirically a method of turning machinelearning algorithms into probabilistic predictors that automatically enjoys a property of validity (perfect calibration) and is computationally efficient. The price to pay for perfect calibration is that these probabilistic predictors produce imprecise (in practice, almost precise for large data sets) probabilities. When these imprecise probabilities are merged into precise probabilities, the resulting predictors, while losing the theoretical property of perfect calibration, are consistently more accurate than the existing methods in empirical studies.

In this paper I discuss both syntax and semantics of subjective probability. The semantics determines ways of testing probability statements. Among important varieties of subjective probabilities are intersubjective probabilities and impersonal probabilities, and I will argue that well-tested impersonal probabilities acquire features of objective probabilities. Jeffreys's law, my next topic, states that two successful probability forecasters must issue forecasts that are close to each other, thus supporting the idea of objective probabilities. Finally, I will discuss connections between subjective and frequentist probability.

This note discusses a simple modification of cross-conformal prediction inspired by recent work on e-values. The precursor of conformal prediction developed in the 1990s by Gammerman, Vapnik, and Vovk was also based on e-values and is called conformal e-prediction in this note. Replacing e-values by p-values led to conformal prediction, which has important advantages over conformal e-prediction without obvious disadvantages. The situation with cross-conformal prediction is, however, different: whereas for cross-conformal prediction validity is only an empirical fact (and can be broken with excessive randomization), this note draws the reader's attention to the obvious fact that cross-conformal e-prediction enjoys a guaranteed property of validity.

Conformal predictive systems are a recent modification of conformal predictors that output, in regression problems, probability distributions for labels of test observations rather than set predictions. The extra information provided by conformal predictive systems may be useful, e.g., in decision making problems. Conformal predictive systems inherit the relative computational inefficiency of conformal predictors. In this paper we discuss two computationally efficient versions of conformal predictive systems, which we call split conformal predictive systems and cross-conformal predictive systems. The main advantage of split conformal predictive systems is their guaranteed validity, whereas for cross-conformal predictive systems validity only holds empirically and in the absence of excessive randomization. The main advantage of cross-conformal predictive systems is their greater predictive efficiency.