arXiv subjects

Yusuf Sale

Publications and source records attributed to Yusuf Sale.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

What Uncertainties Do We Need for Dynamical Systems?

The distinction between aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty has received considerable attention in machine learning research, mainly in the context of supervised learning but also in other settings such as generative modeling. In this paper, we offer a machine learning perspective on uncertainty modeling for dynamical systems, which has been studied much less so far. In particular, we ask: what uncertainties do we need for dynamical systems? We discuss sources of uncertainty, clarify their nature (aleatoric or epistemic), and consider how the objectives of representing and quantifying uncertainty vary across different tasks.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Position: agentic AI orchestration should be Bayes-consistent

LLMs excel at predictive tasks and complex reasoning tasks, but many high-value deployments rely on decisions under uncertainty, for example, which tool to call, which expert to consult, or how many resources to invest. While the usefulness and feasibility of Bayesian approaches remain unclear for LLM inference, this position paper argues that the control layer of an agentic AI system (that orchestrates LLMs and tools) is a clear case where Bayesian principles should shine. Bayesian decision theory provides a framework for agentic systems that can help to maintain beliefs over task-relevant latent quantities, to update these beliefs from observed agentic and human-AI interactions, and to choose actions. Making LLMs themselves explicitly Bayesian belief-updating engines remains computationally intensive and conceptually nontrivial as a general modeling target. In contrast, this paper argues that coherent decision-making requires Bayesian principles at the orchestration level of the agentic system, not necessarily the LLM agent parameters. This paper articulates practical properties for Bayesian control that fit modern agentic AI systems and human-AI collaboration, and provides concrete examples and design patterns to illustrate how calibrated beliefs and utility-aware policies can improve agentic AI orchestration.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Quantification of Credal Uncertainty: A Distance-Based Approach

Credal sets, i.e., closed convex sets of probability measures, provide a natural framework to represent aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty in machine learning. Yet how to quantify these two types of uncertainty for a given credal set, particularly in multiclass classification, remains underexplored. In this paper, we propose a distance-based approach to quantify total, aleatoric, and epistemic uncertainty for credal sets. Concretely, we introduce a family of such measures within the framework of Integral Probability Metrics (IPMs). The resulting quantities admit clear semantic interpretations, satisfy natural theoretical desiderata, and remain computationally tractable for common choices of IPMs. We instantiate the framework with the total variation distance and obtain simple, efficient uncertainty measures for multiclass classification. In the binary case, this choice recovers established uncertainty measures, for which a principled multiclass generalization has so far been missing. Empirical results confirm practical usefulness, with favorable performance at low computational cost.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Efficient Credal Prediction through Decalibration

A reliable representation of uncertainty is essential for the application of modern machine learning methods in safety-critical settings. In this regard, the use of credal sets (i.e., convex sets of probability distributions) has recently been proposed as a suitable approach to representing epistemic uncertainty. However, as with other approaches to epistemic uncertainty, training credal predictors is computationally complex and usually involves (re-)training an ensemble of models. The resulting computational complexity prevents their adoption for complex models such as foundation models and multi-modal systems. To address this problem, we propose an efficient method for credal prediction that is grounded in the notion of relative likelihood and inspired by techniques for the calibration of probabilistic classifiers. For each class label, our method predicts a range of plausible probabilities in the form of an interval. To produce the lower and upper bounds of these intervals, we propose a technique that we refer to as decalibration. Extensive experiments show that our method yields credal sets with strong performance across diverse tasks, including coverage-efficiency evaluation, out-of-distribution detection, and in-context learning. Notably, we demonstrate credal prediction on models such as TabPFN and CLIP -- architectures for which the construction of credal sets was previously infeasible.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Quantifying Epistemic Predictive Uncertainty in Conformal Prediction

We study the problem of quantifying epistemic predictive uncertainty (EPU) -- that is, uncertainty faced at prediction time due to the existence of multiple plausible predictive models -- within the framework of conformal prediction (CP). To expose the implicit model multiplicity underlying CP, we build on recent results showing that, under a mild assumption, any full CP procedure induces a set of closed and convex predictive distributions, commonly referred to as a credal set. Importantly, the conformal prediction region (CPR) coincides exactly with the set of labels to which all distributions in the induced credal set assign probability at least $1-\alpha$. As our first contribution, we prove that this characterisation also holds in split CP. Building on this connection, we then propose a computationally efficient and analytically tractable uncertainty measure, based on \emph{Maximum Mean Imprecision}, to quantify the EPU by measuring the degree of conflicting information within the induced credal set. Experiments on active learning and selective classification demonstrate that the quantified EPU provides substantially more informative and fine-grained uncertainty assessments than reliance on CPR size alone. More broadly, this work highlights the potential of CP serving as a principled basis for decision-making under epistemic uncertainty.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Uncertainty Quantification for Machine Learning: One Size Does Not Fit All

Proper quantification of predictive uncertainty is essential for the use of machine learning in safety-critical applications. Various uncertainty measures have been proposed for this purpose, typically claiming superiority over other measures. In this paper, we argue that there is no single best measure. Instead, uncertainty quantification should be tailored to the specific application. To this end, we use a flexible family of uncertainty measures that distinguishes between total, aleatoric, and epistemic uncertainty of second-order distributions. These measures can be instantiated with specific loss functions, so-called proper scoring rules, to control their characteristics, and we show that different characteristics are useful for different tasks. In particular, we show that, for the task of selective prediction, the scoring rule should ideally match the task loss. On the other hand, for out-of-distribution detection, our results confirm that mutual information, a widely used measure of epistemic uncertainty, performs best. Furthermore, in an active learning setting, epistemic uncertainty based on zero-one loss is shown to consistently outperform other uncertainty measures.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Uncertainty Quantification for Regression: A Unified Framework based on kernel scores

Regression tasks, notably in safety-critical domains, require reliable uncertainty quantification, yet the literature remains largely classification-focused. To address this, we introduce a family of measures for total, aleatoric, and epistemic uncertainty in multivariate regression based on strictly proper kernel scores. The framework provides a principled recipe for designing new uncertainty measures whose behavior, such as tail sensitivity or out-of-distribution responsiveness, is governed by the choice of the underlying kernel, while also encompassing existing measures under a joint analysis. We prove explicit correspondences between properties of the kernel and behavior of resulting uncertainty measures, yielding concrete design guidelines for practitioners. Extensive experiments across structured regression tasks, including spatial and functional domains, demonstrate effectiveness on downstream tasks such as out-of-distribution detection and active learning, and reveal that different kernel choices lead to distinct trade-offs, offering practitioners guidance for task-specific selection.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Uncertainty Quantification with Proper Scoring Rules: Adjusting Measures to Prediction Tasks

We address the problem of uncertainty quantification and propose measures of total, aleatoric, and epistemic uncertainty based on a known decomposition of (strictly) proper scoring rules, a specific type of loss function, into a divergence and an entropy component. This leads to a flexible framework for uncertainty quantification that can be instantiated with different losses (scoring rules), which makes it possible to tailor uncertainty quantification to the use case at hand. We show that this flexibility is indeed advantageous. In particular, we analyze the task of selective prediction and show that the scoring rule should ideally match the task loss. In addition, we perform experiments on two other common tasks. For out-of-distribution detection, our results confirm that a widely used measure of epistemic uncertainty, mutual information, performs best. Moreover, in the setting of active learning, our measure of epistemic uncertainty based on the zero-one-loss consistently outperforms other uncertainty measures.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

An Axiomatic Assessment of Entropy- and Variance-based Uncertainty Quantification in Regression

Uncertainty quantification is crucial in machine learning, yet most (axiomatic) studies of uncertainty measures focus on classification, leaving a gap in regression settings with limited formal justification and evaluations. In this work, we provide a formal way of representing uncertainty in continuous space, using a general parametric formulation, allowing for tractable analysis and evaluation of uncertainty measures. Within this framework, we propose a set of axioms that enable rigorous assessment of total, aleatoric, and epistemic uncertainty measures. Together, this allows for a theoretical examination of uncertainty measures and their corresponding properties. As a specific example, we compare the widely used entropy- and variance-based measures with respect to established predictive models and analyze their limitations and challenges in uncertainty quantification. Our work provides a principled way to understand and develop uncertainty measures in supervised regression, offering theoretical insights and practical guidelines for reliable uncertainty assessment.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Online Selective Conformal Prediction: Errors and Solutions

In online selective conformal inference, data arrives sequentially, and prediction intervals are constructed only when an online selection rule is met. Since online selections may break the exchangeability between the selected test datum and the rest of the data, one must correct for this by suitably selecting the calibration data. In this paper, we evaluate existing calibration selection strategies and pinpoint some fundamental errors in the associated claims that guarantee selection-conditional coverage and control of the false coverage rate (FCR). To address these shortcomings, we propose novel calibration selection strategies that provably preserve the exchangeability of the calibration data and the selected test datum. Consequently, we demonstrate that online selective conformal inference with these strategies guarantees both selection-conditional coverage and FCR control. Our theoretical findings are supported by experimental evidence examining tradeoffs between valid methods.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2025

Conformal Prediction Regions are Imprecise Highest Density Regions

Recently, Cella and Martin proved how, under an assumption called consonance, a credal set (i.e. a closed and convex set of probabilities) can be derived from the conformal transducer associated with transductive conformal prediction. We show that the Imprecise Highest Density Region (IHDR) associated with such a credal set corresponds to the classical Conformal Prediction Region. In proving this result, we establish a new relationship between Conformal Prediction and Imprecise Probability (IP) theories, via the IP concept of a cloud. A byproduct of our presentation is the discovery that consonant plausibility functions are monoid homomorphisms, a new algebraic property of an IP tool.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2025

Conformal Prediction in Hierarchical Classification with Constrained Representation Complexity

Conformal prediction has emerged as a widely used framework for constructing valid prediction sets in classification and regression tasks. In this work, we extend the split conformal prediction framework to hierarchical classification, where prediction sets are commonly restricted to internal nodes of a predefined hierarchy, and propose two computationally efficient inference algorithms. The first algorithm returns internal nodes as prediction sets, while the second one relaxes this restriction. Using the notion of representation complexity, the latter yields smaller set sizes at the cost of a more general and combinatorial inference problem. Empirical evaluations on several benchmark datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithms in achieving nominal coverage.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2024

Label-wise Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty Quantification

We present a novel approach to uncertainty quantification in classification tasks based on label-wise decomposition of uncertainty measures. This label-wise perspective allows uncertainty to be quantified at the individual class level, thereby improving cost-sensitive decision-making and helping understand the sources of uncertainty. Furthermore, it allows to define total, aleatoric, and epistemic uncertainty on the basis of non-categorical measures such as variance, going beyond common entropy-based measures. In particular, variance-based measures address some of the limitations associated with established methods that have recently been discussed in the literature. We show that our proposed measures adhere to a number of desirable properties. Through empirical evaluation on a variety of benchmark data sets -- including applications in the medical domain where accurate uncertainty quantification is crucial -- we establish the effectiveness of label-wise uncertainty quantification.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Quantifying Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty with Proper Scoring Rules

Uncertainty representation and quantification are paramount in machine learning and constitute an important prerequisite for safety-critical applications. In this paper, we propose novel measures for the quantification of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty based on proper scoring rules, which are loss functions with the meaningful property that they incentivize the learner to predict ground-truth (conditional) probabilities. We assume two common representations of (epistemic) uncertainty, namely, in terms of a credal set, i.e. a set of probability distributions, or a second-order distribution, i.e., a distribution over probability distributions. Our framework establishes a natural bridge between these representations. We provide a formal justification of our approach and introduce new measures of epistemic and aleatoric uncertainty as concrete instantiations.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Explaining Bayesian Optimization by Shapley Values Facilitates Human-AI Collaboration

Bayesian optimization (BO) with Gaussian processes (GP) has become an indispensable algorithm for black box optimization problems. Not without a dash of irony, BO is often considered a black box itself, lacking ways to provide reasons as to why certain parameters are proposed to be evaluated. This is particularly relevant in human-in-the-loop applications of BO, such as in robotics. We address this issue by proposing ShapleyBO, a framework for interpreting BO's proposals by game-theoretic Shapley values.They quantify each parameter's contribution to BO's acquisition function. Exploiting the linearity of Shapley values, we are further able to identify how strongly each parameter drives BO's exploration and exploitation for additive acquisition functions like the confidence bound. We also show that ShapleyBO can disentangle the contributions to exploration into those that explore aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty. Moreover, our method gives rise to a ShapleyBO-assisted human machine interface (HMI), allowing users to interfere with BO in case proposals do not align with human reasoning. We demonstrate this HMI's benefits for the use case of personalizing wearable robotic devices (assistive back exosuits) by human-in-the-loop BO. Results suggest human-BO teams with access to ShapleyBO can achieve lower regret than teams without.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

Second-Order Uncertainty Quantification: Variance-Based Measures

Uncertainty quantification is a critical aspect of machine learning models, providing important insights into the reliability of predictions and aiding the decision-making process in real-world applications. This paper proposes a novel way to use variance-based measures to quantify uncertainty on the basis of second-order distributions in classification problems. A distinctive feature of the measures is the ability to reason about uncertainties on a class-based level, which is useful in situations where nuanced decision-making is required. Recalling some properties from the literature, we highlight that the variance-based measures satisfy important (axiomatic) properties. In addition to this axiomatic approach, we present empirical results showing the measures to be effective and competitive to commonly used entropy-based measures.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

Second-Order Uncertainty Quantification: A Distance-Based Approach

In the past couple of years, various approaches to representing and quantifying different types of predictive uncertainty in machine learning, notably in the setting of classification, have been proposed on the basis of second-order probability distributions, i.e., predictions in the form of distributions on probability distributions. A completely conclusive solution has not yet been found, however, as shown by recent criticisms of commonly used uncertainty measures associated with second-order distributions, identifying undesirable theoretical properties of these measures. In light of these criticisms, we propose a set of formal criteria that meaningful uncertainty measures for predictive uncertainty based on second-order distributions should obey. Moreover, we provide a general framework for developing uncertainty measures to account for these criteria, and offer an instantiation based on the Wasserstein distance, for which we prove that all criteria are satisfied.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

A Novel Bayes' Theorem for Upper Probabilities

In their seminal 1990 paper, Wasserman and Kadane establish an upper bound for the Bayes' posterior probability of a measurable set $A$, when the prior lies in a class of probability measures $\mathcal{P}$ and the likelihood is precise. They also give a sufficient condition for such upper bound to hold with equality. In this paper, we introduce a generalization of their result by additionally addressing uncertainty related to the likelihood. We give an upper bound for the posterior probability when both the prior and the likelihood belong to a set of probabilities. Furthermore, we give a sufficient condition for this upper bound to become an equality. This result is interesting on its own, and has the potential of being applied to various fields of engineering (e.g. model predictive control), machine learning, and artificial intelligence.

stat.ML↗