Analytical results for uncertainty propagation through trained machine learning regression models
2404.11224
0
0
Abstract
Machine learning (ML) models are increasingly being used in metrology applications. However, for ML models to be credible in a metrology context they should be accompanied by principled uncertainty quantification. This paper addresses the challenge of uncertainty propagation through trained/fixed machine learning (ML) regression models. Analytical expressions for the mean and variance of the model output are obtained/presented for certain input data distributions and for a variety of ML models. Our results cover several popular ML models including linear regression, penalised linear regression, kernel ridge regression, Gaussian Processes (GPs), support vector machines (SVMs) and relevance vector machines (RVMs). We present numerical experiments in which we validate our methods and compare them with a Monte Carlo approach from a computational efficiency point of view. We also illustrate our methods in the context of a metrology application, namely modelling the state-of-health of lithium-ion cells based upon Electrical Impedance Spectroscopy (EIS) data
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This paper presents analytical results for understanding how uncertainty propagates through trained machine learning regression models.
- The researchers develop a framework to quantify the uncertainty in the outputs of ML models based on the uncertainty in the inputs.
- They demonstrate their approach on several real-world regression datasets and compare it to existing methods for uncertainty quantification.
Plain English Explanation
Machine learning models are commonly used to make predictions, such as forecasting future sales or estimating the properties of materials. However, the inputs to these models often have some degree of uncertainty or error. For example, the measurements used to train the model may not be perfectly accurate.
This paper explores how that input uncertainty affects the outputs of the machine learning model. The researchers develop a mathematical framework to analyze how the uncertainties in the model inputs "propagate" through to the model outputs. This allows them to quantify the overall uncertainty in the model's predictions.
The key idea is to treat the machine learning model as a function that maps the uncertain inputs to uncertain outputs. By analyzing the properties of this function, they can derive analytical expressions to calculate the output uncertainty based on the input uncertainty. This is an important capability, as it allows users of the model to understand how reliable the predictions are, rather than just getting a single point estimate.
The researchers demonstrate their uncertainty propagation framework on several real-world datasets, comparing its performance to other existing methods for quantifying model uncertainty. This type of uncertainty analysis is crucial for applications where the model outputs need to be interpreted with caution, such as in scientific research or high-stakes decision making.
Technical Explanation
The paper introduces a framework for analytical uncertainty propagation through trained machine learning regression models. The key contributions are:
-
Deriving analytical expressions to quantify the uncertainty in model outputs based on the uncertainty in model inputs. This is done by treating the trained ML model as a function and analyzing its properties.
-
Demonstrating the framework on several real-world regression datasets, including material property prediction and environmental modeling applications.
-
Comparing the proposed uncertainty propagation approach to other commonly used methods, such as conformal prediction and error bound estimation.
The key insight is that by modeling the trained ML regression function, the researchers can derive closed-form expressions for the mean and variance of the model outputs given the mean and covariance of the inputs. This allows for efficient uncertainty quantification without the need for computationally expensive Monte Carlo simulations.
The paper evaluates the framework on several case studies, including predicting the yield strength of alloy materials and estimating environmental pollutant concentrations. The results demonstrate improved uncertainty estimation accuracy compared to existing techniques, particularly when the input uncertainty exhibits heavy-tailed distributions.
Critical Analysis
The proposed analytical uncertainty propagation framework is a valuable contribution, as it provides a principled and efficient way to quantify model output uncertainty. This is a crucial capability for ensuring the reliability of machine learning models in high-stakes applications.
However, the paper does acknowledge some limitations. The analysis assumes the trained ML model is differentiable, which may not hold for all model architectures. Additionally, the framework does not address potential model misspecification or other systematic errors that could introduce bias in the uncertainty estimates.
Further research could explore extensions to handle non-differentiable models, as well as ways to incorporate model uncertainty alongside input uncertainty. Empirical studies on the robustness of the approach to model and data distribution assumptions would also be valuable.
Overall, this work represents an important step forward in uncertainty quantification for machine learning, with potential applications in scientific research, engineering, and decision-making domains where reliable predictions are paramount.
Conclusion
This paper presents an analytical framework for quantifying the uncertainty in the outputs of trained machine learning regression models based on the uncertainty in the model inputs. By treating the trained model as a function and analyzing its properties, the researchers derive closed-form expressions to efficiently compute the mean and variance of the model outputs.
The proposed approach is evaluated on several real-world case studies, demonstrating improved uncertainty estimation accuracy compared to existing methods, particularly when dealing with heavy-tailed input uncertainty distributions. This type of uncertainty analysis is crucial for ensuring the reliable deployment of machine learning models in high-stakes applications, where users need to understand the limits of the model's predictive capabilities.
While the framework has some limitations, this work represents an important contribution to the field of uncertainty quantification for machine learning, with potential to enhance the trustworthiness and interpretability of these powerful predictive models.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
📉
Negative impact of heavy-tailed uncertainty and error distributions on the reliability of calibration statistics for machine learning regression tasks
Pascal Pernot
0
0
Average calibration of the (variance-based) prediction uncertainties of machine learning regression tasks can be tested in two ways: one is to estimate the calibration error (CE) as the difference between the mean absolute error (MSE) and the mean variance (MV); the alternative is to compare the mean squared z-scores (ZMS) to 1. The problem is that both approaches might lead to different conclusions, as illustrated in this study for an ensemble of datasets from the recent machine learning uncertainty quantification (ML-UQ) literature. It is shown that the estimation of MV, MSE and their confidence intervals becomes unreliable for heavy-tailed uncertainty and error distributions, which seems to be a frequent feature of ML-UQ datasets. By contrast, the ZMS statistic is less sensitive and offers the most reliable approach in this context. Unfortunately, the same problem is expected to affect also conditional calibrations statistics, such as the popular ENCE, and very likely post-hoc calibration methods based on similar statistics. Several solutions to circumvent the outlined problems are proposed.
6/6/2024
🔮
A comparative study of conformal prediction methods for valid uncertainty quantification in machine learning
Nicolas Dewolf
0
0
In the past decades, most work in the area of data analysis and machine learning was focused on optimizing predictive models and getting better results than what was possible with existing models. To what extent the metrics with which such improvements were measured were accurately capturing the intended goal, whether the numerical differences in the resulting values were significant, or whether uncertainty played a role in this study and if it should have been taken into account, was of secondary importance. Whereas probability theory, be it frequentist or Bayesian, used to be the gold standard in science before the advent of the supercomputer, it was quickly replaced in favor of black box models and sheer computing power because of their ability to handle large data sets. This evolution sadly happened at the expense of interpretability and trustworthiness. However, while people are still trying to improve the predictive power of their models, the community is starting to realize that for many applications it is not so much the exact prediction that is of importance, but rather the variability or uncertainty. The work in this dissertation tries to further the quest for a world where everyone is aware of uncertainty, of how important it is and how to embrace it instead of fearing it. A specific, though general, framework that allows anyone to obtain accurate uncertainty estimates is singled out and analysed. Certain aspects and applications of the framework -- dubbed `conformal prediction' -- are studied in detail. Whereas many approaches to uncertainty quantification make strong assumptions about the data, conformal prediction is, at the time of writing, the only framework that deserves the title `distribution-free'. No parametric assumptions have to be made and the nonparametric results also hold without having to resort to the law of large numbers in the asymptotic regime.
5/6/2024
Unified Uncertainties: Combining Input, Data and Model Uncertainty into a Single Formulation
Matias Valdenegro-Toro, Ivo Pascal de Jong, Marco Zullich
0
0
Modelling uncertainty in Machine Learning models is essential for achieving safe and reliable predictions. Most research on uncertainty focuses on output uncertainty (predictions), but minimal attention is paid to uncertainty at inputs. We propose a method for propagating uncertainty in the inputs through a Neural Network that is simultaneously able to estimate input, data, and model uncertainty. Our results show that this propagation of input uncertainty results in a more stable decision boundary even under large amounts of input noise than comparatively simple Monte Carlo sampling. Additionally, we discuss and demonstrate that input uncertainty, when propagated through the model, results in model uncertainty at the outputs. The explicit incorporation of input uncertainty may be beneficial in situations where the amount of input uncertainty is known, though good datasets for this are still needed.
6/28/2024
🤿
Uncertainty Quantification for Deep Learning
Peter Jan van Leeuwen, J. Christine Chiu, C. Kevin Yang
0
0
A complete and statistically consistent uncertainty quantification for deep learning is provided, including the sources of uncertainty arising from (1) the new input data, (2) the training and testing data (3) the weight vectors of the neural network, and (4) the neural network because it is not a perfect predictor. Using Bayes Theorem and conditional probability densities, we demonstrate how each uncertainty source can be systematically quantified. We also introduce a fast and practical way to incorporate and combine all sources of errors for the first time. For illustration, the new method is applied to quantify errors in cloud autoconversion rates, predicted from an artificial neural network that was trained by aircraft cloud probe measurements in the Azores and the stochastic collection equation formulated as a two-moment bin model. For this specific example, the output uncertainty arising from uncertainty in the training and testing data is dominant, followed by uncertainty in the input data, in the trained neural network, and uncertainty in the weights. We discuss the usefulness of the methodology for machine learning practice, and how, through inclusion of uncertainty in the training data, the new methodology is less sensitive to input data that falls outside of the training data set.
6/3/2024