To Trust or Not to Trust: On Calibration in ML-Based Resource Allocation for Wireless Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the next generation communications and networks, machine learning (ML) models are expected to deliver not only highly accurate predictions, but also well-calibrated confidence scores that reflect the true likelihood of correct decisions. In this paper, we study the calibration performance of an ML-based outage predictor within a single-user, multi-resource allocation framework. We begin by establishing key theoretical properties of this system's outage probability (OP) under perfect calibration. Importantly, we show that as the number of resources grows, the OP of a perfectly calibrated predictor approaches the expected output conditioned on it being below the classification threshold. In contrast, when only a single resource is available, the system's OP equals the model's overall expected output. We then derive the OP conditions for a perfectly calibrated predictor. These findings guide the choice of the classification threshold to achieve a desired OP, helping system designers meet specific reliability requirements. We further demonstrate that post-processing calibration cannot improve the system's minimum achievable OP, as it does not introduce additional information about future channel states. Additionally, we show that well-calibrated models are part of a broader class of predictors that necessarily improve OP. In particular, we establish a monotonicity condition that the accuracy-confidence function must satisfy for such improvement to occur. To demonstrate these theoretical properties, we conduct a rigorous simulation-based analysis using post-processing calibration techniques, namely, Platt scaling and isotonic regression. As part of this framework, the predictor is trained using an outage loss function specifically designed for this system. Furthermore, this analysis is performed on Rayleigh fading channels with temporal correlation captured by Clarke's 2D model, which accounts for receiver mobility. Notably, the outage investigated refers to the required resource failing to achieve the transmission capacity requested by the user.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".