Technical Note: The CREDIBLE Uncertainty Estimation (CURE) toolbox: facilitating the communication of epistemic uncertainty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. There is a general trend for increasing inclusion of uncertainty estimation in the environmental modelling domain. We present the CREDIBLE Uncertainty Estimation (CURE) Toolbox, an open source MATLABTM toolbox for uncertainty estimation aimed at scientists and practitioners that are not necessarily experts in uncertainty estimation. The toolbox focusses on environmental simulation models and hence employs a range of different Monte Carlo methods for forward and conditioned uncertainty estimation. The methods included span both formal statistical and informal approaches, which are demonstrated using a range of modelling applications set up as workflow scripts. The workflow scripts provide examples of how to utilise toolbox functions for a variety of modelling applications and hence aid the user in defining their own workflow: additional help is provided by extensively commented code. The toolbox implementation aims to increase the uptake of uncertainty estimation methods within a framework designed to be open and explicit, in a way that tries to represent best practice in applying the methods included. Best practice in the evaluation of modelling assumptions and choices, specifically including epistemic uncertainties, is also included by the incorporation of a condition tree that allows users to record assumptions and choices made as an audit trail log.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.090 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.096 | 0.068 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".