arXiv (All)
open access
When uncertainty quantification fails: structural vulnerabilities and corrections for selective prediction under clinical class imbalance
Background. Selective prediction systems improve the safety of clinical artificial intelligence by deferring ambiguous cases to human experts while automating high-confidence decisions. However, this safety mechanism relies entirely on the premise that uncertainty scores accurately reflect clinical
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Trustworthy Predictive Distributions for Tail Events with Semiparametric Diagnostic Transport Maps#1050836
- Fair equality of chances for prediction-based decisions#706235
- Diagnostic reasoning with and without AI: automation bias in pre-clerkship medical students.#1374140
- Optimal presentation of decision explanations: investigating the effects of explainability and reliability on medical diagnostic performance with conversational AI.#1266979
- Beyond Uncertainty Sets: Leveraging Optimal Transport to Extend Conformal Predictive Distributions to Multivariate Settings#1142582
Record · ID 1469231
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive