WQLCP: Weighted Adaptive Conformal Prediction for Robust Uncertainty Quantification Under Distribution Shifts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conformal prediction (CP) provides a framework for constructing prediction sets with guaranteed coverage, assuming exchangeable data. However, real-world scenarios often involve distribution shifts that violate exchangeability, leading to unreliable coverage and inflated prediction sets. To address this challenge, we first introduce Reconstruction Loss-Scaled Conformal Prediction (RLSCP), which utilizes reconstruction losses derived from a Variational Autoencoder (VAE) as an uncertainty metric to scale score functions. While RLSCP demonstrates performance improvements, mainly resulting in better coverage, it quantifies quantiles based on a fixed calibration dataset with-out considering the discrepancies between test and train datasets in an unexchangeable setting. In the next step, we propose Weighted Quantile Loss-scaled Conformal Prediction (WQLCP), which refines RLSCP by incorporating a weighted notion of exchangeability, adjusting the calibration quantile threshold based on weights with respect to the ratio of calibration and test loss values. This approach improves the CP-generated prediction set outputs in the presence of distribution shifts. Experiments on large-scale datasets, including ImageNet variants, demonstrate that WQLCP outperforms existing baselines by consistently maintaining coverage while reducing prediction set sizes, providing a robust solution for CP under distribution shifts.
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 | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".