arXiv Machine Learning By Amir Rafe, Subasish Das

A distribution-free certification framework for trustworthy crash-severity prediction

Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →

The paper introduces a distribution‑free certification layer that can be applied to any crash‑severity prediction model without modifying the model itself. It provides guarantees for ordinal outcomes, per‑class validity, transfer of coverage to unobserved severities, and one‑sided certificates under deployment shift, all grounded in a functional of the true data law. The framework is evaluated on 5.2 million Texas records, demonstrating a model‑independent lower bound on set width for vulnerable road users and is released as an open‑source package with theorem‑level tests.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.

arXiv AI
Sep 1

Benchmark Contamination: A Taxonomy Organized by Defeated Mitigation

The paper introduces a new taxonomy for benchmark contamination that categorizes leakage by the mitigation it defeats—direct, derivative, temporal, distributional, and acquired—covering both training‑time and evaluation‑time scenarios. It proposes a four‑field disclosure protocol to record contamination status alongside benchmark scores, and provides a JSON schema, validator, and examples. An empirical study of 41 documents using a pre‑registered instrument shows limited reporting of contamination types and variable reliability, highlighting gaps in current disclosure practices.

By Johanna Angulo, V\'ictor Yeste, Hector Espinos-Morato
arXiv AI
Sep 2

Counterfactual Fragility Certificates: Exposing High-Confidence Brittleness under Structured Evidence Failure

The paper introduces Counterfactual Fragility Certificates (CFC), a model‑agnostic audit protocol that maps each prediction to an evidence‑failure trajectory, summarizing it with metrics such as greedy flip budget, margin‑collapse area, degradation thresholds, and fragility dominance score. CFC is shown to identify brittle high‑confidence predictions on seven tabular benchmarks with an AUROC of 0.915, outperforming existing scalar scores by up to +0.405. The method remains effective across various perturbation and review‑budget scenarios, and can also inform fragility‑aware regularization and temperature correction.

By Filippo Cenacchi, Longbing Cao, Runze Yang
arXiv AI
Aug 24

Prediction certification cannot replace explanation certification: a competence envelope for trustworthy AI under compound stress

The paper argues that prediction‑based certifications—such as accuracy, calibration, and conformal coverage—are insufficient to guarantee trustworthy AI. It proves a separation theorem showing that a model can appear reliable under all prediction‑side certificates yet differ arbitrarily in explanation fidelity and deployment behaviour. The authors propose a competence envelope framework that combines both prediction and explanation certification to detect such hidden failures.

By Nataliya Shakhovska, Ivan Izonin, Stergios-Aristoteles Mitoulis