arXiv subjects

Tuwe Löfström

Publications and source records attributed to Tuwe Löfström.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

When Explanations Compete: Policy-Aware Selection Under Uncertainty

Uncertainty-aware explanation methods often produce several alternatives for the same prediction. Selecting among them requires a policy for balancing prediction confidence, uncertainty, and application constraints. This paper presents a framework for applying such policies to a fixed set of generated explanations. Candidates are characterised by uncertainty change, prediction direction, and, when available, interval position relative to a decision boundary. The framework combines these properties with eligibility rules, optional bidirectional Pareto screening, and policy-aware ranking. A fictitious prostate-cancer example illustrates how different explanatory purposes lead to different selections from the same candidate set. We instantiate the framework with Calibrated Explanations for classification, thresholded regression, and plain regression. Across 41 benchmark datasets, mean candidate counts range from 11.57 to 21.75 for single-feature explanations and from $29.48$ to $69.53$ when conjunctions are included. Equal-weight and confidence-only policies yield an average selection-disagreement rate of $28.7\%$ while favouring the same confidence direction. A supporting $δ$-CLUE experiment demonstrates use with a second generator. By making the selection policy explicit, the framework allows applications to compare and prioritise explanations according to their intended use.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Concerning Uncertainty -- A Systematic Survey of Uncertainty-Aware XAI

This paper surveys uncertainty-aware explainable artificial intelligence (UAXAI), examining how uncertainty is incorporated into explanatory pipelines and how such methods are evaluated. Across the literature, three recurring approaches to uncertainty quantification emerge (Bayesian, Monte Carlo, and Conformal methods), alongside distinct strategies for integrating uncertainty into explanations: assessing trustworthiness, constraining models or explanations, and explicitly communicating uncertainty. Evaluation practices remain fragmented and largely model centered, with limited attention to users and inconsistent reporting of reliability properties (e.g., calibration, coverage, explanation stability). Recent work leans towards calibration, distribution free techniques and recognizes explainer variability as a central concern. We argue that progress in UAXAI requires unified evaluation principles that link uncertainty propagation, robustness, and human decision-making, and highlight counterfactual and calibration approaches as promising avenues for aligning interpretability with reliability.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

Classification with Reject Option: Distribution-free Error Guarantees via Conformal Prediction

Machine learning (ML) models always make a prediction, even when they are likely to be wrong. This causes problems in practical applications, as we do not know if we should trust a prediction. ML with reject option addresses this issue by abstaining from making a prediction if it is likely to be incorrect. In this work, we formalise the approach to ML with reject option in binary classification, deriving theoretical guarantees on the resulting error rate. This is achieved through conformal prediction (CP), which produce prediction sets with distribution-free validity guarantees. In binary classification, CP can output prediction sets containing exactly one, two or no labels. By accepting only the singleton predictions, we turn CP into a binary classifier with reject option. Here, CP is formally put in the framework of predicting with reject option. We state and prove the resulting error rate, and give finite sample estimates. Numerical examples provide illustrations of derived error rate through several different conformal prediction settings, ranging from full conformal prediction to offline batch inductive conformal prediction. The former has a direct link to sharp validity guarantees, whereas the latter is more fuzzy in terms of validity guarantees but can be used in practice. Error-reject curves illustrate the trade-off between error rate and reject rate, and can serve to aid a user to set an acceptable error rate or reject rate in practice.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2025

Beyond Conformal Predictors: Adaptive Conformal Inference with Confidence Predictors

Adaptive Conformal Inference (ACI) provides finite-sample coverage guarantees, enhancing the prediction reliability under non-exchangeability. This study demonstrates that these desirable properties of ACI do not require the use of Conformal Predictors (CP). We show that the guarantees hold for the broader class of confidence predictors, defined by the requirement of producing nested prediction sets, a property we argue is essential for meaningful confidence statements. We empirically investigate the performance of Non-Conformal Confidence Predictors (NCCP) against CP when used with ACI on non-exchangeable data. In online settings, the NCCP offers significant computational advantages while maintaining a comparable predictive efficiency. In batch settings, inductive NCCP (INCCP) can outperform inductive CP (ICP) by utilising the full training dataset without requiring a separate calibration set, leading to improved efficiency, particularly when the data are limited. Although these initial results highlight NCCP as a theoretically sound and practically effective alternative to CP for uncertainty quantification with ACI in non-exchangeable scenarios, further empirical studies are warranted across diverse datasets and predictors.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2024

Fast Calibrated Explanations: Efficient and Uncertainty-Aware Explanations for Machine Learning Models

This paper introduces Fast Calibrated Explanations, a method designed for generating rapid, uncertainty-aware explanations for machine learning models. By incorporating perturbation techniques from ConformaSight - a global explanation framework - into the core elements of Calibrated Explanations (CE), we achieve significant speedups. These core elements include local feature importance with calibrated predictions, both of which retain uncertainty quantification. While the new method sacrifices a small degree of detail, it excels in computational efficiency, making it ideal for high-stakes, real-time applications. Fast Calibrated Explanations are applicable to probabilistic explanations in classification and thresholded regression tasks, where they provide the likelihood of a target being above or below a user-defined threshold. This approach maintains the versatility of CE for both classification and probabilistic regression, making it suitable for a range of predictive tasks where uncertainty quantification is crucial.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Calibrated Explanations for Regression

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is often an integral part of modern decision support systems. The best-performing predictive models used in AI-based decision support systems lack transparency. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) aims to create AI systems that can explain their rationale to human users. Local explanations in XAI can provide information about the causes of individual predictions in terms of feature importance. However, a critical drawback of existing local explanation methods is their inability to quantify the uncertainty associated with a feature's importance. This paper introduces an extension of a feature importance explanation method, Calibrated Explanations, previously only supporting classification, with support for standard regression and probabilistic regression, i.e., the probability that the target is above an arbitrary threshold. The extension for regression keeps all the benefits of Calibrated Explanations, such as calibration of the prediction from the underlying model with confidence intervals, uncertainty quantification of feature importance, and allows both factual and counterfactual explanations. Calibrated Explanations for standard regression provides fast, reliable, stable, and robust explanations. Calibrated Explanations for probabilistic regression provides an entirely new way of creating probabilistic explanations from any ordinary regression model, allowing dynamic selection of thresholds. The method is model agnostic with easily understood conditional rules. An implementation in Python is freely available on GitHub and for installation using both pip and conda, making the results in this paper easily replicable.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

Well-Calibrated Probabilistic Predictive Maintenance using Venn-Abers

When using machine learning for fault detection, a common problem is the fact that most data sets are very unbalanced, with the minority class (a fault) being the interesting one. In this paper, we investigate the usage of Venn-Abers predictors, looking specifically at the effect on the minority class predictions. A key property of Venn-Abers predictors is that they output well-calibrated probability intervals. In the experiments, we apply Venn-Abers calibration to decision trees, random forests and XGBoost models, showing how both overconfident and underconfident models are corrected. In addition, the benefit of using the valid probability intervals produced by Venn-Abers for decision support is demonstrated. When using techniques producing opaque underlying models, e.g., random forest and XGBoost, each prediction will consist of not only the label, but also a valid probability interval, where the width is an indication of the confidence in the estimate. Adding Venn-Abers on top of a decision tree allows inspection and analysis of the model, to understand both the underlying relationship, and finding out in which parts of feature space that the model is accurate and/or confident.

cs.LG↗