The Benefit of Being Bayesian in Online Conformal Prediction
Zhiyu Zhang, Zhou Lu, Heng Yang

TL;DR
This paper introduces a Bayesian-regularized online conformal prediction algorithm that adaptively provides confidence sets with low regret, ensuring valid coverage in iid data and robustness in adversarial settings.
Contribution
It proposes a novel Bayesian regularization approach to combine distributional and adversarial conformal prediction methods, overcoming previous limitations.
Findings
Achieves low regret for multiple confidence levels without statistical assumptions.
Guarantees correct coverage in iid data scenarios.
Overcomes monotonicity issues in online quantile prediction.
Abstract
Based on the framework of Conformal Prediction (CP), we study the online construction of confidence sets given a black-box machine learning model. By converting the target confidence levels into quantile levels, the problem can be reduced to predicting the quantiles (in hindsight) of a sequentially revealed data sequence. Two very different approaches have been studied previously: (i) Assuming the data sequence is iid or exchangeable, one could maintain the empirical distribution of the observed data as an algorithmic belief, and directly predict its quantiles. (ii) Due to the fragility of statistical assumptions, a recent trend is to consider the non-distributional, adversarial setting and apply first-order online optimization algorithms to moving quantile losses. However, it requires the oracle knowledge of the target quantile level, and suffers from a previously overlooked…
Peer Reviews
Decision·Submitted to ICLR 2025
The paper is overall clearly written (I did not check carefully the math in Appendix B) and the proposed method is both simple and seems to have good guarantees.
I would have like more details on the numerical experiments. From what I understand, the figures only show that the method reaches the target coverage, but what about the size of the prediction sets that it produces ? How does it compare to other methods ? Also, the memory usage of the method ( O(\sqrt(T}) for the quantized version) seems redhibitory at first glance, but is not evaluated in practice in the experiments.
- The paper is clearly written and comprehensively explains its novel Bayesian approach to online conformal prediction. It effectively outlines the limitations of existing methods and clearly presents its contributions. The theoretical foundations are well-developed, and the empirical results are presented to complement the theory, making the concepts accessible to readers. The structure allows for an easy understanding of the core ideas, technical details, and the practical advantages of the pr
I do not see serious weak points.
It is true, and perhaps helpful, to point out that quantile-tracking algorithms can be incoherent in terms of the confidence sets that they deliver for different values of alpha. It is also useful to point out that FTRL can address this issue. Some of the other detailed critiques of Gibbs & Candes (e.g., the overshooting) are reasonable.
I'm not entirely sure what I've learned from the paper, other than being reminded of some of the virtues of FTRL. Indeed, I want to emphasize that as best I can tell, this is a FTRL paper. The connection to Bayesian inference is weak at best, and not very helpful. There's a regularizer, but that alone doesn't make for Bayesian inference. At the end of the paper, there's a suggestion that when regularization involves adding a uniform distribution to an empirical distribution we can interpret
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsGaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
