analiza aiqbench
This research introduces a novel framework for handling label uncertainty in machine learning by distinguishing between within-label imprecision and genuine disagreement among multiple experts. By modeling expert intervals with Beta distributions and decomposing predictive uncertainty into specific components, the method offers a more robust validation of model confidence against observed expert variation. The approach demonstrates significant performance gains on sea-ice concentration tasks, suggesting broader applicability to domains where expert interpretation varies inherently.
Uncertainty-Aware Learning from Multi-Expert Interval Targets
arXiv:2610.00102v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Many machine learning (ML) applications rely on expert labels, and qualified experts may provide different but plausible interpretations of the same observation. Such variation across expert labels may reflect genuine disagreement or ambiguity rather than annotation error. When individual experts additionally report intervals rather than exact values, the supervision contains two distinct sources of label uncertainty: within-label imprecision and between-expert variation. Existing methods treat these forms separately: multi-expert approaches collapse labels to a consensus, interval-target methods often yield a single prediction, and predictive-uncertainty methods rarely validate their uncertainty estimates against observed expert disagreement. To address this problem, we propose an approach that preserves individual expert intervals, separates within-label imprecision from between-expert variation, and validates the corresponding predictive uncertainty components. First, heterogeneous label vocabularies are harmonized into a common probabilistic label space, separating encoding differences from expert judgement. Second, individual label intervals are retained and modeled with a mixture of Beta distributions trained using a proper Cram\'er-distance objective, preserving distinct expert-reported labels. Third, we decompose predictive uncertainty into within-component, between-component, and model uncertainty, and evaluate whether these components correspond to within-label uncertainty, between-label uncertainty, and model error, respectively. Because this correspondence is not guaranteed, we introduce decomposition matching, which aligns the predictive components to their intended label-side sources. On sea-ice concentration the model reduces MAE by 31\% over hard labels and outperforms aggregation, interval-distribution, and interval-regression baselines.
Abstract:Many machine learning (ML) applications rely on expert labels, and qualified experts may provide different but plausible interpretations of the same observation. Such variation across expert labels may reflect genuine disagreement or ambiguity rather than annotation error. When individual experts additionally report intervals rather than exact values, the supervision contains two distinct sources of label uncertainty: within-label imprecision and between-expert variation. Existing methods treat these forms separately: multi-expert approaches collapse labels to a consensus, interval-target methods often yield a single prediction, and predictive-uncertainty methods rarely validate their uncertainty estimates against observed expert disagreement. To address this problem, we propose an approach that preserves individual expert intervals, separates within-label imprecision from between-expert variation, and validates the corresponding predictive uncertainty components. First, heterogeneous label vocabularies are harmonized into a common probabilistic label space, separating encoding differences from expert judgement. Second, individual label intervals are retained and modeled with a mixture of Beta distributions trained using a proper Cramér-distance objective, preserving distinct expert-reported labels. Third, we decompose predictive uncertainty into within-component, between-component, and model uncertainty, and evaluate whether these components correspond to within-label uncertainty, between-label uncertainty, and model error, respectively. Because this correspondence is not guaranteed, we introduce decomposition matching, which aligns the predictive components to their intended label-side sources. On sea-ice concentration the model reduces MAE by 31\% over hard labels and outperforms aggregation, interval-distribution, and interval-regression baselines.
Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2610.00102 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2610.00102v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.00102 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 318 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Trustworthy Protein-Ligand Binding Affinity Prediction via Reliability-Aware Multi-Engine Fusion
arXiv · 21 iul. 2026
Current AIs out-persuade professionals in lab settings but (probably) not in the world
LessWrong · 5 oct. 2026

Projection sampling preserves capabilities but diminishes gains from alignment fine-tuning
LessWrong · 16 oct. 2026
Uncertainty-Aware Sea-Ice Type Mapping with Multiple Ice Charts
arXiv · 10 sept. 2026