aiqbench analysis
Composing insight from the full article — this may take a moment.
Abstention Spends Its Budget on Local Label Variance More Than on Novelty: Auditing Conformal Calibration and Selective Prediction under Molecular Scaffold Shift
arXiv:2611.01512v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Selective prediction with split conformal calibration promises a post-hoc fix for molecular property prediction: abstain on the least reliable compounds, ideally out-of-distribution chemistry, and the retained set becomes trustworthy without retraining. We audit this recipe for a gradient-boosted fingerprint model on lipophilicity (regression) and BBBP (classification) under a Bemis-Murcko scaffold split, holding the fitted model and evaluation molecules fixed while varying only the calibration fold (18 replicates). (i) On lipophilicity, coverage depends on calibration provenance: calibrating on held-out training-scaffold molecules falls below nominal (PICP 0.841 at a 0.90 target), while novel-scaffold calibration recovers it (0.904); on BBBP, coverage stays above nominal in every regime. (ii) For split conformalized quantile regression (CQR) the conformal correction is a constant, so conformalization does not change what is abstained on. (iii) The abstention score (CQR width; effectively ensemble variance on BBBP) tracks local label variance more than chemical novelty: controlling for local label variance largely explains away the novelty association (partial Spearman 0.067 and 0.047). (iv) At a fixed assay budget, gating on interval width or ensemble variance never improves hit precision over ranking by point prediction, at the pre-specified operating point or across 20 exploratory settings; a plain novelty gate shows small, uncorrected gains at the smallest budgets. (v) In an exploratory analysis, exact conformal selection exceeds its false discovery rate target under training-scaffold calibration (0.303 at q=0.2) and is consistent with it under novel-scaffold calibration, contributing a data-driven batch size rather than a better ranking. Conformalization earns its keep through guarantees whose validity hinges on calibration provenance, not by choosing what to abstain on.
Read the full article at arXivRelated coverage
The Missing "I Don't Know": Why Three Reasoning-Reliability Findings Converge on Calibrated Abstention
arXiv · Sep 17, 2026
FinAbstain: Uncertainty-Calibrated Multimodal RAG for Selective Financial Forecasting
arXiv · Jul 29, 2026

[AINews] High Taste Testers Ep. 1
Latent Space · Oct 17, 2026
Efficiency Hallucination: Formalizing and Measuring Behavioral Calibration in LLM-Based Code Optimization
arXiv · Sep 16, 2026