Abstract
With the increasing use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), the dependability of AI-based software components becomes a key factor, especially in the context of safety-critical applications. However, as current AI-based models are data-driven, there is an inherent uncertainty associated with their outcomes. Some in-model uncertainty quantification (UQ) approaches integrate techniques during model construction to obtain information about the uncertainties during inference, e.g., deep ensembles, but do not provide probabilistic guarantees. Two model-agnostic UQ approaches that both provide probabilistic guarantees are conformal prediction (CP), and uncertainty wrappers (UWs). Yet, they differentiate in the type of quantifications they provide. CP provides sets or regions containing the intended outcome with a given probability, UWs provide uncertainty estimates for point predictions. To investigate how well they perform compared to each other and a baseline in-model UQ approach, we provide a side-by-side comparison based on their key characteristics. Additionally, we introduce an approach combining UWs with CP. The UQ approaches are benchmarked with respect to point uncertainty estimates, and to prediction sets. Regarding point uncertainty estimates, the UW shows the best reliability as CP was not designed for this task. For the task of providing prediction sets, the combined approach of UWs with CP outperforms the other approaches with respect to adaptivity and conditional coverage.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Kläs, M., Sembach, L.: Uncertainty wrappers for data-driven models – increase the transparency of AI/ML-based models through enrichment with dependable situation-aware uncertainty estimates. In: Romanovsky, A., Troubitsyna, E., Gashi, I., Schoitsch, E., Bitsch, F. (eds.) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. SAFECOMP 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 11699, pp. 358–364. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26250-1_29
Shafer, G., Vovk, V.: A tutorial on conformal prediction. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 9(3), 371–421 (2008)
Angelopoulos, A.N., Bates, S.: Conformal prediction: A gentle introduction. Found. Trends Mach. Learn. 16(4), 494–591 (2023)
de Grancey, F., Jean-Luc, A., Alecu, L., Gerchinovitz, S., Mamalet, F., Vigouroux, D.: Object detection with probabilistic guarantees: a conformal prediction approach. In: WAISE (2022)
Kläs, M., Vollmer, A.M.: Uncertainty in Machine Learning Applications: A Practice-Driven Classification of Uncertainty. In: Gallina, B., Skavhaug, A., Schoitsch, E., Bitsch, F. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2018. LNCS, vol. 11094, pp. 431–438. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99229-7_36
Guo, C., Pleiss, G., Sun, Y., Weinberger, K.: On calibration of modern neural networks. In: ICML (2017)
Kläs, M., Jöckel, L.: A framework for building uncertainty wrappers for AI/ML-based data-driven components. In: Casimiro, A., Ortmeier, F., Schoitsch, E., Bitsch, F., Ferreira, P. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2020. LNCS, vol. 12235, pp. 315–327. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55583-2_23
Koopman, P., Osyk, B., Weast, J.: Autonomous vehicles meet the physical world: RSS, variability, uncertainty, and proving safety. In: Romanovsky, A., Troubitsyna, E., Bitsch, F. (eds.) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. SAFECOMP 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 11698, pp. 245–253. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26601-1_17
Amoukou, S.I., Brunel, N.J.B.: Adaptive conformal prediction by reweighting nonconformity score. arXiv:2303.12695 (2023)
Clopper, C.J., Pearson, E.S.: The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial. Biometrika 26(4), 404–413 (1934)
Brier, G.W.: Verification of forecasts expressed in terms of probability. Mon. Weather Rev. 78(1), 1–3 (1950)
Murphy, A.H.: A new vector partition of the probability score. J. Appl. Meteorol. 12(4), 595–600 (1973)
Jöckel, L., Kläs, M.: Could we relieve AI/ML models of the responsibility of providing dependable uncertainty estimates? A study on outside-model uncertainty estimates. In: Habli, I., Sujan, M., Bitsch, F. (eds.) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. SAFECOMP 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 12852, pp. 18–33. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83903-1_2
Arrieta, A.B., et al.: Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI): concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI. Inf. Fusion 58, 82–115 (2020)
Kläs, M., Adler, R., Sorokos, I., Jöckel, L., Reich, J.: Handling uncertainties of data-driven models in compliance with safety constraints for autonomous behaviour. In: EDDC (2021)
Groß, J., Adler, R., Kläs, M., Reich, J., Jöckel, L., Gansch, R.: Architectural patterns for handling runtime uncertainty of data-driven models in safety-critical perception. In: Trapp, M., Saglietti, F., Spisländer, M., Bitsch, F. (eds.) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. SAFECOMP 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 13414, pp. 284–297.Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14835-4_19
German Traffic Sign Benchmarks. http://benchmark.ini.rub.de/?section=gtsrb. Accessed 11 May 2023
Jöckel, L., Kläs, M.: Increasing trust in data-driven model validation – a framework for probabilistic augmentation of images and meta-data generation using application scope characteristics. In: Romanovsky, A., Troubitsyna, E., Bitsch, F. (eds.) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. SAFECOMP 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 11698, pp. 155–164. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26601-1_11
Arcos-García, Á., Alvarez-Garcia, J., Soria Morillo, L.: Deep neural network for traffic sign recognition systems: an analysis of spatial transformers and stochastic optimisation methods. Neural Netw. 99, 158–165 (2018)
Acknowledgments
Parts of this work have been funded by the project “LOPAAS” as part of the internal funding program “ICON” of the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft, and by the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy in the project “SPELL”.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Jöckel, L., Kläs, M., Groß, J., Gerber, P. (2023). Conformal Prediction and Uncertainty Wrapper: What Statistical Guarantees Can You Get for Uncertainty Quantification in Machine Learning?. In: Guiochet, J., Tonetta, S., Schoitsch, E., Roy, M., Bitsch, F. (eds) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security. SAFECOMP 2023 Workshops. SAFECOMP 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14182. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40953-0_26
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40953-0_26
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-40952-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-40953-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)