Is Epistemic Uncertainty Faithfully Represented by Evidential Deep Learning Methods?
0
🤿
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Accurate predictions are not enough for trustworthy machine learning systems
- They must also provide a reliable representation of their uncertainty
- Bayesian methods are commonly used to quantify both aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty
- Evidential deep learning is a newer approach that extends empirical risk minimization to predict second-order probability distributions
Plain English Explanation
Machine learning models don't just need to make accurate predictions, they also need to provide a clear understanding of how confident they are in those predictions. Bayesian methods are commonly used to measure two types of uncertainty: aleatoric (inherent randomness) and epistemic (model uncertainty).
In recent years, an alternative approach called evidential deep learning has gained popularity. This method extends the standard machine learning objective of minimizing empirical risk to instead predict a second-order probability distribution. From this distribution, measures of epistemic (and aleatoric) uncertainty can be extracted.
Technical Explanation
This paper provides novel theoretical insights into the evidential deep learning approach. It highlights the challenges in optimizing these second-order loss functions and interpreting the resulting epistemic uncertainty measures.
The paper takes a systematic approach, covering classification, regression, and count modeling tasks. It provides new insights into issues of identifiability and convergence when minimizing these second-order loss functions. It also emphasizes that the epistemic uncertainty measures produced are relative rather than absolute.
Critical Analysis
The paper acknowledges the difficulties in optimizing and interpreting the epistemic uncertainty measures produced by evidential deep learning. It cautions that these uncertainty estimates are relative, rather than providing an absolute scale.
While the paper offers valuable theoretical insights, it does not address the practical implications or real-world applications of evidential deep learning. Further research is needed to understand how these uncertainty estimates perform in deployed dose prediction systems and other high-stakes use cases.
Conclusion
This paper provides an in-depth technical analysis of the evidential deep learning approach to uncertainty quantification in machine learning models. It highlights the challenges in optimizing and interpreting the resulting epistemic uncertainty measures, emphasizing their relative nature. These insights can help guide future research and development of trustworthy AI systems that can reliably communicate their level of confidence.
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
🤿
0
Is Epistemic Uncertainty Faithfully Represented by Evidential Deep Learning Methods?
Mira Jurgens, Nis Meinert, Viktor Bengs, Eyke Hullermeier, Willem Waegeman
Trustworthy ML systems should not only return accurate predictions, but also a reliable representation of their uncertainty. Bayesian methods are commonly used to quantify both aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty, but alternative approaches, such as evidential deep learning methods, have become popular in recent years. The latter group of methods in essence extends empirical risk minimization (ERM) for predicting second-order probability distributions over outcomes, from which measures of epistemic (and aleatoric) uncertainty can be extracted. This paper presents novel theoretical insights of evidential deep learning, highlighting the difficulties in optimizing second-order loss functions and interpreting the resulting epistemic uncertainty measures. With a systematic setup that covers a wide range of approaches for classification, regression and counts, it provides novel insights into issues of identifiability and convergence in second-order loss minimization, and the relative (rather than absolute) nature of epistemic uncertainty measures.
Read more9/11/2024
0
Are Uncertainty Quantification Capabilities of Evidential Deep Learning a Mirage?
Maohao Shen, J. Jon Ryu, Soumya Ghosh, Yuheng Bu, Prasanna Sattigeri, Subhro Das, Gregory W. Wornell
This paper questions the effectiveness of a modern predictive uncertainty quantification approach, called emph{evidential deep learning} (EDL), in which a single neural network model is trained to learn a meta distribution over the predictive distribution by minimizing a specific objective function. Despite their perceived strong empirical performance on downstream tasks, a line of recent studies by Bengs et al. identify limitations of the existing methods to conclude their learned epistemic uncertainties are unreliable, e.g., in that they are non-vanishing even with infinite data. Building on and sharpening such analysis, we 1) provide a sharper understanding of the asymptotic behavior of a wide class of EDL methods by unifying various objective functions; 2) reveal that the EDL methods can be better interpreted as an out-of-distribution detection algorithm based on energy-based-models; and 3) conduct extensive ablation studies to better assess their empirical effectiveness with real-world datasets. Through all these analyses, we conclude that even when EDL methods are empirically effective on downstream tasks, this occurs despite their poor uncertainty quantification capabilities. Our investigation suggests that incorporating model uncertainty can help EDL methods faithfully quantify uncertainties and further improve performance on representative downstream tasks, albeit at the cost of additional computational complexity.
Read more6/14/2024
0
A Comprehensive Survey on Evidential Deep Learning and Its Applications
Junyu Gao, Mengyuan Chen, Liangyu Xiang, Changsheng Xu
Reliable uncertainty estimation has become a crucial requirement for the industrial deployment of deep learning algorithms, particularly in high-risk applications such as autonomous driving and medical diagnosis. However, mainstream uncertainty estimation methods, based on deep ensembling or Bayesian neural networks, generally impose substantial computational overhead. To address this challenge, a novel paradigm called Evidential Deep Learning (EDL) has emerged, providing reliable uncertainty estimation with minimal additional computation in a single forward pass. This survey provides a comprehensive overview of the current research on EDL, designed to offer readers a broad introduction to the field without assuming prior knowledge. Specifically, we first delve into the theoretical foundation of EDL, the subjective logic theory, and discuss its distinctions from other uncertainty estimation frameworks. We further present existing theoretical advancements in EDL from four perspectives: reformulating the evidence collection process, improving uncertainty estimation via OOD samples, delving into various training strategies, and evidential regression networks. Thereafter, we elaborate on its extensive applications across various machine learning paradigms and downstream tasks. In the end, an outlook on future directions for better performances and broader adoption of EDL is provided, highlighting potential research avenues.
Read more9/10/2024
🔎
0
On the Calibration of Epistemic Uncertainty: Principles, Paradoxes and Conflictual Loss
Mohammed Fellaji, Fr'ed'eric Pennerath, Brieuc Conan-Guez, Miguel Couceiro
The calibration of predictive distributions has been widely studied in deep learning, but the same cannot be said about the more specific epistemic uncertainty as produced by Deep Ensembles, Bayesian Deep Networks, or Evidential Deep Networks. Although measurable, this form of uncertainty is difficult to calibrate on an objective basis as it depends on the prior for which a variety of choices exist. Nevertheless, epistemic uncertainty must in all cases satisfy two formal requirements: first, it must decrease when the training dataset gets larger and, second, it must increase when the model expressiveness grows. Despite these expectations, our experimental study shows that on several reference datasets and models, measures of epistemic uncertainty violate these requirements, sometimes presenting trends completely opposite to those expected. These paradoxes between expectation and reality raise the question of the true utility of epistemic uncertainty as estimated by these models. A formal argument suggests that this disagreement is due to a poor approximation of the posterior distribution rather than to a flaw in the measure itself. Based on this observation, we propose a regularization function for deep ensembles, called conflictual loss in line with the above requirements. We emphasize its strengths by showing experimentally that it restores both requirements of epistemic uncertainty, without sacrificing either the performance or the calibration of the deep ensembles.
Read more7/18/2024