arXiv preprint ·
When uncertainty quantification fails: structural vulnerabilities and corrections for selective prediction under clinical class imbalance
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
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 ambiguity. In prognostic tasks characterized by severe class imbalance, where the clinical outcome of interest is a minority, this assumption breaks down. Standard uncertainty measures cease to capture clinically aligned ambiguity; instead, they become a proxy for class membership, systematically penalizing minority patients regardless of their individual predictive clarity. Results. Across 56 synthetic conditions and three neurodegenerative cohorts spanning severe class imbalance to near-balanced conditions (multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's Disease), our framework consistently maintained bounded, balanced risk across trajectories. In contrast, global metrics either collapsed minority Sensitivity or protected the minority at the expense of majority patients. Applying CCR with standard entropy fails to protect the minority because it breaks within-class monotonicity when tau=0.5. Combining CCR with threshold-aware metrics restores strict monotonicity, correctly identifies ambiguous patients, and safely mitigates minority exclusion. Conclusions. Under clinical class imbalance, standard uncertainty quantification measures dataset sparsity rather than clinical ambiguity, creating a systemic illusion of safety. This bias is a correctable structural flaw. Clinical pipelines deploying selective prediction under imbalance should adopt threshold-aligned uncertainty measures and class-stratified evaluation. This reduces class-specific risk imbalance, supporting safer selective prediction under the evaluated conditions without silently excluding the most vulnerable patients.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Machine Learning
Repulsive Population Policy Gradients for Behaviorally Diverse Reinforcement Learning
What Can Firms Do in the Face of Model Distillation?
LM-DSB: A Lightweight Multi-agent System for Automated Daily Safety Bulletin Generation in Construction
Predicting What Answer Engines Cite: Open Decision Models, Rerankers and a Distilled 4B Student on Ten Engines under Controlled Retrieval
Your Agent Acts Differently When You're Around: How User Presence Changes Agent Behavior in Negotiation
Get the few papers worth your time in Machine Learning every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.