arXiv subjects

Willem Waegeman

Publications and source records attributed to Willem Waegeman.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Single-Query Black-Box Calibration Auditing via Logit Bias

Evaluating the calibration of Large Language Models (LLMs) is critical for their safe deployment as zero-shot classifiers. Yet, commercial API providers increasingly hide the continuous output probabilities required by standard calibration metrics. To bypass this opacity, we demonstrate that any LLM API exposing a logit\_bias parameter can be mathematically manipulated to evaluate exact probability thresholds using strictly one query per sample. Leveraging this mechanism, we introduce a novel and provably consistent estimator of the True Calibration Error for binary tasks. Our approach therefore provides an efficient framework for auditing black-box foundation models.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

When should we trust the annotation? Selective prediction for molecular structure retrieval from mass spectra

Machine learning methods for identifying molecular structures from tandem mass spectra (MS/MS) have advanced rapidly, yet current approaches still exhibit significant error rates. In high-stakes applications such as clinical metabolomics and environmental screening, incorrect annotations can have serious consequences, making it essential to determine when a prediction can be trusted. In this work, we introduce a selective prediction framework for molecular structure retrieval from MS/MS spectra, separating low-risk predictions automatically from lower-confidence predictions. We formulate the problem within the risk-coverage tradeoff framework and systematically evaluate uncertainty quantification strategies at three levels: input-level distance in the learned representation, fingerprint-level uncertainty over predicted molecular fingerprint bits, and retrieval-level uncertainty over candidate rankings. We compare scoring functions including first-order confidence measures, aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty estimates from second-order distributions, as well as distance-based measures in the latent space. All experiments are conducted on the MassSpecGym benchmark. Our analysis reveals that while fingerprint-level uncertainty scores are poor proxies for retrieval success, retrieval-level total uncertainty provides the overall strongest rejection criterion, and first-order confidence measures are computationally inexpensive, strong baselines. We demonstrate that by applying distribution-free risk control via generalisation bounds, practitioners can specify a tolerable error rate and obtain a subset of annotations satisfying that constraint with high probability.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Evaluating Epistemic Uncertainty: Beyond OOD Detection and Active Learning

Current evaluation of epistemic uncertainty relies on tasks such as out-ofdistribution detection and active learning. However, the Bayes-optimal decision strategies for these tasks do not coincide with the scores commonly used to quantify epistemic uncertainty. Building on the epistemic reject-option framework, we evaluate epistemic uncertainty using its ability to identify regret, the reducible error. Formulating selective prediction as a constrained optimization over coverage, expected risk, and regret, we prove the optimal selector is a thresholded convex combination of the ground-truth aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties. This theoretical unification exposes a weakness in recent uncertainty disentanglement literature: we demonstrate that standard correlation metrics between learned components do not necessarily predict their actual operational utility. We instead propose to evaluate the achievable risk, regret, coverage surface of the decomposition as a diagnostic for joint disentanglement and utility. Benchmarking standard methods on datasets with dense human annotations reveals that decision-theoretic rankings can disagree substantially with proxy-task rankings, including pairwise rank inversions between methods that are top-ranked on one criterion and bottom-ranked on other.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Optimal Conformal Prediction under Epistemic Uncertainty

Conformal prediction (CP) is a widely used frequentist framework to quantify uncertainty by constructing prediction sets with user-specified marginal coverage guarantees. In practice, CP is typically applied on top of probabilistic classifiers, which are able to express aleatoric but not epistemic uncertainty. In this paper, we consider the question of how to optimally employ CP on top of a more expressive formalism, namely credal sets, which can express both aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty. More specifically, we propose probabilistic Bernoulli prediction sets (BPS) and derive a variant that achieves conditional coverage for valid credal sets while remaining minimal in expected size. We then address the more realistic scenario in which the validity of the credal sets is not guaranteed. Assuming access to calibration data with ground-truth distributions over labels, we apply conformal risk control to BPS and derive a PAC-style guarantee: with high probability over the data, the achieved conditional coverage is at least the desired level. We validate our theoretical findings empirically over various datasets.

stat.ML↗

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

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↗

arXiv2026

Small molecule retrieval from tandem mass spectrometry: what are we optimizing for?

One of the central challenges in the computational analysis of liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) data is to identify the compounds underlying the output spectra. In recent years, this problem is increasingly tackled using deep learning methods. A common strategy involves predicting a molecular fingerprint vector from an input mass spectrum, which is then used to search for matches in a chemical compound database. While various loss functions are employed in training these predictive models, their impact on model performance remains poorly understood. In this study, we investigate commonly used loss functions, deriving novel regret bounds that characterize when Bayes-optimal decisions for these objectives must diverge. Our results reveal a fundamental trade-off between the two objectives of (1) fingerprint similarity and (2) molecular retrieval. Optimizing for more accurate fingerprint predictions typically worsens retrieval results, and vice versa. Our theoretical analysis shows this trade-off depends on the similarity structure of candidate sets, providing guidance for loss function and fingerprint selection.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Reducing Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty through Multi-modal Data Acquisition

To generate accurate and reliable predictions, modern AI systems need to combine data from multiple modalities, such as text, images, audio, spreadsheets, and time series. Multi-modal data introduces new opportunities and challenges for disentangling uncertainty: it is commonly assumed in the machine learning community that epistemic uncertainty can be reduced by collecting more data, while aleatoric uncertainty is irreducible. However, this assumption is challenged in modern AI systems when information is obtained from different modalities. This paper introduces an innovative data acquisition framework where uncertainty disentanglement leads to actionable decisions, allowing sampling in two directions: sample size and data modality. The main hypothesis is that aleatoric uncertainty decreases as the number of modalities increases, while epistemic uncertainty decreases by collecting more observations. We provide proof-of-concept implementations on two multi-modal datasets to showcase our data acquisition framework, which combines ideas from active learning, active feature acquisition and uncertainty quantification.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Position: Epistemic uncertainty estimation methods are fundamentally incomplete

Identifying and disentangling sources of predictive uncertainty is essential for trustworthy supervised learning. We argue that widely used second-order methods that disentangle aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty are fundamentally incomplete. First, we show that unaccounted bias contaminates uncertainty estimates by overestimating aleatoric (data-related) uncertainty and underestimating the epistemic (model-related) counterpart, leading to incorrect uncertainty quantification. Second, we demonstrate that existing methods capture only partial contributions to the variance-driven part of epistemic uncertainty; different approaches account for different variance sources, yielding estimates that are incomplete and difficult to interpret. Together, these results highlight that current epistemic uncertainty estimates can only be used in safety-critical and high-stakes decision-making when limitations are fully understood by end users and acknowledged by AI developers.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

A calibration test for evaluating set-based epistemic uncertainty representations

The accurate representation of epistemic uncertainty is a challenging yet essential task in machine learning. A widely used representation corresponds to convex sets of probabilistic predictors, also known as credal sets. One popular way of constructing these credal sets is via ensembling or specialized supervised learning methods, where the epistemic uncertainty can be quantified through measures such as the set size or the disagreement among members. In principle, these sets should contain the true data-generating distribution. As a necessary condition for this validity, we adopt the strongest notion of calibration as a proxy. Concretely, we propose a novel statistical test to determine whether there is a convex combination of the set's predictions that is calibrated in distribution. In contrast to previous methods, our framework allows the convex combination to be instance dependent, recognizing that different ensemble members may be better calibrated in different regions of the input space. Moreover, we learn this combination via proper scoring rules, which inherently optimize for calibration. Building on differentiable, kernel-based estimators of calibration errors, we introduce a nonparametric testing procedure and demonstrate the benefits of capturing instance-level variability on of synthetic and real-world experiments.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Conformal Prediction for Uncertainty Estimation in Drug-Target Interaction Prediction

Accurate drug-target interaction (DTI) prediction with machine learning models is essential for drug discovery. Such models should also provide a credible representation of their uncertainty, but applying classical marginal conformal prediction (CP) in DTI prediction often overlooks variability across drug and protein subgroups. In this work, we analyze three cluster-conditioned CP methods for DTI prediction, and compare them with marginal and group-conditioned CP. Clusterings are obtained via nonconformity scores, feature similarity, and nearest neighbors, respectively. Experiments on the KIBA dataset using four data-splitting strategies show that nonconformity-based clustering yields the tightest intervals and most reliable subgroup coverage, especially in random and fully unseen drug-protein splits. Group-conditioned CP works well when one entity is familiar, but residual-driven clustering provides robust uncertainty estimates even in sparse or novel scenarios. These results highlight the potential of cluster-based CP for improving DTI prediction under uncertainty.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Enhancing Drug-Target Interaction Prediction through Transfer Learning from Activity Cliff Prediction Tasks

Recently, machine learning (ML) has gained popularity in the early stages of drug discovery. This trend is unsurprising given the increasing volume of relevant experimental data and the continuous improvement of ML algorithms. However, conventional models, which rely on the principle of molecular similarity, often fail to capture the complexities of chemical interactions, particularly those involving activity cliffs (ACs) - compounds that are structurally similar but exhibit evidently different activity behaviors. In this work, we address two distinct yet related tasks: (1) activity cliff (AC) prediction and (2) drug-target interaction (DTI) prediction. Leveraging insights gained from the AC prediction task, we aim to improve the performance of DTI prediction through transfer learning. A universal model was developed for AC prediction, capable of identifying activity cliffs across diverse targets. Insights from this model were then incorporated into DTI prediction, enabling better handling of challenging cases involving ACs while maintaining similar overall performance. This approach establishes a strong foundation for integrating AC awareness into predictive models for drug discovery. Scientific Contribution This study presents a novel approach that applies transfer learning from AC prediction to enhance DTI prediction, addressing limitations of traditional similarity-based models. By introducing AC-awareness, we improve DTI model performance in structurally complex regions, demonstrating the benefits of integrating compound-specific and protein-contextual information. Unlike previous studies, which treat AC and DTI predictions as separate problems, this work establishes a unified framework to address both data scarcity and prediction challenges in drug discovery.

q-bio.BM↗

arXiv2024

Is Epistemic Uncertainty Faithfully Represented by Evidential Deep Learning Methods?

Trustworthy ML systems should not only return accurate predictions, but also a reliable representation of their uncertainty. Bayesian methods are commonly used to quantify both aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty, but alternative approaches, such as evidential deep learning methods, have become popular in recent years. The latter group of methods in essence extends empirical risk minimization (ERM) for predicting second-order probability distributions over outcomes, from which measures of epistemic (and aleatoric) uncertainty can be extracted. This paper presents novel theoretical insights of evidential deep learning, highlighting the difficulties in optimizing second-order loss functions and interpreting the resulting epistemic uncertainty measures. With a systematic setup that covers a wide range of approaches for classification, regression and counts, it provides novel insights into issues of identifiability and convergence in second-order loss minimization, and the relative (rather than absolute) nature of epistemic uncertainty measures.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2024

Assessment of Uncertainty Quantification in Universal Differential Equations

Scientific Machine Learning is a new class of approaches that integrate physical knowledge and mechanistic models with data-driven techniques for uncovering governing equations of complex processes. Among the available approaches, Universal Differential Equations (UDEs) are used to combine prior knowledge in the form of mechanistic formulations with universal function approximators, like neural networks. Integral to the efficacy of UDEs is the joint estimation of parameters within mechanistic formulations and the universal function approximators using empirical data. The robustness and applicability of resultant models, however, hinge upon the rigorous quantification of uncertainties associated with these parameters, as well as the predictive capabilities of the overall model or its constituent components. With this work, we provide a formalisation of uncertainty quantification (UQ) for UDEs and investigate important frequentist and Bayesian methods. By analysing three synthetic examples of varying complexity, we evaluate the validity and efficiency of ensembles, variational inference and Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling as epistemic UQ methods for UDEs.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2024

Conditional validity of heteroskedastic conformal regression

Conformal prediction, and split conformal prediction as a specific implementation, offer a distribution-free approach to estimating prediction intervals with statistical guarantees. Recent work has shown that split conformal prediction can produce state-of-the-art prediction intervals when focusing on marginal coverage, i.e. on a calibration dataset the method produces on average prediction intervals that contain the ground truth with a predefined coverage level. However, such intervals are often not adaptive, which can be problematic for regression problems with heteroskedastic noise. This paper tries to shed new light on how prediction intervals can be constructed, using methods such as normalized and Mondrian conformal prediction, in such a way that they adapt to the heteroskedasticity of the underlying process. Theoretical and experimental results are presented in which these methods are compared in a systematic way. In particular, it is shown how the conditional validity of a chosen conformal predictor can be related to (implicit) assumptions about the data-generating distribution.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2024

Valid prediction intervals for regression problems

Over the last few decades, various methods have been proposed for estimating prediction intervals in regression settings, including Bayesian methods, ensemble methods, direct interval estimation methods and conformal prediction methods. An important issue is the calibration of these methods: the generated prediction intervals should have a predefined coverage level, without being overly conservative. In this work, we review the above four classes of methods from a conceptual and experimental point of view. Results on benchmark data sets from various domains highlight large fluctuations in performance from one data set to another. These observations can be attributed to the violation of certain assumptions that are inherent to some classes of methods. We illustrate how conformal prediction can be used as a general calibration procedure for methods that deliver poor results without a calibration step.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2023

On the Calibration of Probabilistic Classifier Sets

Multi-class classification methods that produce sets of probabilistic classifiers, such as ensemble learning methods, are able to model aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty. Aleatoric uncertainty is then typically quantified via the Bayes error, and epistemic uncertainty via the size of the set. In this paper, we extend the notion of calibration, which is commonly used to evaluate the validity of the aleatoric uncertainty representation of a single probabilistic classifier, to assess the validity of an epistemic uncertainty representation obtained by sets of probabilistic classifiers. Broadly speaking, we call a set of probabilistic classifiers calibrated if one can find a calibrated convex combination of these classifiers. To evaluate this notion of calibration, we propose a novel nonparametric calibration test that generalizes an existing test for single probabilistic classifiers to the case of sets of probabilistic classifiers. Making use of this test, we empirically show that ensembles of deep neural networks are often not well calibrated.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2023

The out-of-sample $R^2$: estimation and inference

Out-of-sample prediction is the acid test of predictive models, yet an independent test dataset is often not available for assessment of the prediction error. For this reason, out-of-sample performance is commonly estimated using data splitting algorithms such as cross-validation or the bootstrap. For quantitative outcomes, the ratio of variance explained to total variance can be summarized by the coefficient of determination or in-sample $R^2$, which is easy to interpret and to compare across different outcome variables. As opposed to the in-sample $R^2$, the out-of-sample $R^2$ has not been well defined and the variability on the out-of-sample $\hat{R}^2$ has been largely ignored. Usually only its point estimate is reported, hampering formal comparison of predictability of different outcome variables. Here we explicitly define the out-of-sample $R^2$ as a comparison of two predictive models, provide an unbiased estimator and exploit recent theoretical advances on uncertainty of data splitting estimates to provide a standard error for the $\hat{R}^2$. The performance of the estimators for the $R^2$ and its standard error are investigated in a simulation study. We demonstrate our new method by constructing confidence intervals and comparing models for prediction of quantitative $\text{Brassica napus}$ and $\text{Zea mays}$ phenotypes based on gene expression data.

stat.ME↗