Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This paper addresses a critical gap in neuroimaging AI by demonstrating that deterministic graph neural networks often exhibit severe overconfidence when applied to connectome-based diagnostic tasks. The authors argue that integrating uncertainty quantification frameworks is essential for building trustworthy clinical biomarkers, highlighting the dangerous divergence between high accuracy and poor calibration in current models.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Uncertainty Quantification Is Indispensable for Reliable Connectome-Based Graph Learning: A Narrative Review and Case Study

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2610.08353v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While graph neural networks (GNNs) have shown substantial promise in connectome-based diagnostic classification, deterministic models inevitably suppress pipeline-induced noise and model ambiguities, yielding overconfident predictions. Although uncertainty quantification (UQ) is widely adopted in voxel-level segmentation, its role in connectomic graph learning remains largely unaddressed. This paper presents a comprehensive narrative review of UQ frameworks tailored to connectome graph learning alongside an empirical case study demonstrating the perils of uncalibrated predictions. We delineate sources of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty across neuroimaging pipelines and review prominent UQ paradigms, from Bayesian approximations and ensemble methods to evidential learning and conformal prediction. In our case study, a temporal Graph Attention Network (GAT) trained on dynamic functional connectivity (dFC) matrices from the SUDMEX CONN dataset achieves 80.0% diagnostic accuracy (F1 = 0.794) for Cocaine Use Disorder. However, a post-hoc uncertainty audit via Monte Carlo dropout reveals severe overconfidence (ECE = 0.127), with misclassified subjects assigned prediction confidences up to 95%. This empirical divergence between discrimination and calibration underscores the confidence paradox in deep connectomics. Our findings establish that rigorous UQ, calibration, and selective prediction mechanisms are indispensable for deploying trustworthy graph-based biomarkers in clinical neuroscience.

Abstract:While graph neural networks (GNNs) have shown substantial promise in connectome-based diagnostic classification, deterministic models inevitably suppress pipeline-induced noise and model ambiguities, yielding overconfident predictions. Although uncertainty quantification (UQ) is widely adopted in voxel-level segmentation, its role in connectomic graph learning remains largely unaddressed. This paper presents a comprehensive narrative review of UQ frameworks tailored to connectome graph learning alongside an empirical case study demonstrating the perils of uncalibrated predictions. We delineate sources of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty across neuroimaging pipelines and review prominent UQ paradigms, from Bayesian approximations and ensemble methods to evidential learning and conformal prediction. In our case study, a temporal Graph Attention Network (GAT) trained on dynamic functional connectivity (dFC) matrices from the SUDMEX CONN dataset achieves 80.0% diagnostic accuracy (F1 = 0.794) for Cocaine Use Disorder. However, a post-hoc uncertainty audit via Monte Carlo dropout reveals severe overconfidence (ECE = 0.127), with misclassified subjects assigned prediction confidences up to 95%. This empirical divergence between discrimination and calibration underscores the confidence paradox in deep connectomics. Our findings establish that rigorous UQ, calibration, and selective prediction mechanisms are indispensable for deploying trustworthy graph-based biomarkers in clinical neuroscience.

Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2610.08353 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2610.08353v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.08353 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 284 words

Related coverage