Learn then Test: Calibrating Predictive Algorithms to Achieve Risk Control
Open accessAbstract
We introduce a framework for calibrating machine learning models so that their predictions satisfy explicit, finite-sample statistical guarantees. Our calibration algorithms work with any underlying model and (unknown) data-generating distribution and do not require model refitting. The framework addresses, among other examples, false discovery rate control in multi-label classification, intersection-over-union control in instance segmentation, and the simultaneous control of the type-1 error of outlier detection and confidence set coverage in classification or regression. Our main insight is to reframe the risk-control problem as multiple hypothesis testing, enabling techniques and mathematical arguments different from those in the previous literature. We use the framework to provide new calibration methods for several core machine learning tasks, with detailed worked examples in computer vision and tabular medical data.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The algorithm presented herein differs from previous high-probability risk control work: it has a guarantee in expectation, and neither the algorithm nor its analysis share much technical similarity with these previous works.
“the algorithm presented herein differs greatly: it has a guarantee in expectation, and neither the algorithm nor its analysis share much technical similarity with these previous works.”
From Conformal Risk Control (2022) · cites this paper as [19]
Cites
Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2016.90 · Cited by 235,474 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
RULE: Reliable Multimodal RAG for Factuality in Medical Vision Language Models
Xia, P., Zhu, K., Li, H., Zhu, H., Li, Y., Li, G., Zhang, L., & Yao, H. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.62 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Angelopoulos, A. N., Bates, S., Fisch, A., Lei, L., & Schuster, T. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2208.02814 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Angelopoulos, A. N., Bates, S., Candès, E. J., Jordan, M. I., & Lei, L.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Berkeley (US)
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- Stanford University (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2021
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1641-1662
- ISSN
- 1932-6157 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2110.01052
- OpenAlex
- W4410803261
- Cited by
- 100
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 55 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 23.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- The Annals of Applied Statistics (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Algorithms
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
- Keywords
- model calibration, risk control, finite-sample guarantees, false discovery rate control, multi-label classification, intersection over union, instance segmentation, multiple comparisons, object detection, Detectron2
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review