arXiv:2608.29789math.OCcs.LG2026-08

统一视角揭示了置信预测与分布鲁棒优化的内在联系。

A Unified Perspective on Conformal Prediction and Wasserstein Distributionally Robust Optimization for Uncertainty Quantification

论文配图:A Unified Perspective on Conformal Prediction and Wasserstein Distributionally Robust Optimization for Uncertainty Quantification
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 将两类方法都视为基于校准数据的分位数估计器构建方式。
  • 两者均在高概率下保证真实分布的覆盖率,但校准条件相同。
  • 置信预测通过水平膨胀修正,分布鲁棒优化通过值空间修正避免过调。

从有限数据中进行不确定性量化是机器学习、优化和自动化系统的核心问题,尤其在样本有限且测试时分布发生偏移的情况下。置信预测(CP)和分布鲁棒优化(DRO)提供了两种互补的方法:CP 在可交换性假设下构建具有分布无关的有限样本有效性的预测集;而 DRO 则在经验分布附近的模糊集上优化最差情况表现。本文提出一种统一的概率视角,将两者视为将有限校准数据转化为一个数据依赖的分位数估计器,使测试得分低于该分位数的概率很高。在此视角下,CP 和 DRO 沿同一类估计器的两个坐标对经验分位数进行修正:CP 通过提升分位数水平,而 DRO 通过模糊半径调整分位数值。两者均在给定校准样本条件下,以高概率确保真实分布的覆盖率。两者的构造不同:CP 采用封闭形式、分布无关的水平修正;而 DRO 使用值空间修正,其认证半径依赖于未知分布的性质,并保证在模糊集上的覆盖均匀性。这一差异在得分分布尾部尤为明显——由于 CP 依赖校准样本的上尾序统计量,当这些样本在目标分位数附近稀疏时,其水平膨胀会过度修正,而合理选择的 DRO 半径可在值空间修正,避免此类过调。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Uncertainty quantification from finite data is central to machine learning, optimization, and automation systems, where decisions must remain reliable under limited samples and test-time distribution shift. Conformal prediction (CP) and distributionally robust optimization (DRO) offer two complementary approaches: CP constructs data-dependent prediction sets with distribution-free finite-sample validity under exchangeability, while DRO optimizes worst-case performance over an ambiguity set around an empirical distribution. We develop a unified probabilistic perspective on CP and DRO by viewing both as ways to turn finite calibration data into a data-dependent quantile estimator that a test score falls below with high probability. From this perspective, CP and DRO correct the empirical quantile along two coordinates of the same family of estimators: CP inflates the quantile level, whereas DRO shifts the quantile value through an ambiguity radius. Both methods provide the same calibration-conditional guarantee for the true distribution, requiring the target coverage to hold with high probability over the calibration sample. Their constructions differ, however: CP uses a closed-form, distribution-free level correction, while DRO uses a value-space correction whose certified radius depends on properties of the unknown distribution and additionally guarantees coverage uniformly over the ambiguity set. This distinction emerges in the tails of the score distribution. Because CP relies on sparse upper-tail order statistics of the calibration samples, its level inflation barely moves the estimator when those samples are dense near the target quantile but overshoots when they are sparse, whereas a well-chosen DRO radius corrects in value space and may avoid this overshoot.

不确定性量化置信预测分布鲁棒优化分位数估计

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。