Isotonic regression (IR) is shape-constrained regression to maintain a univariate fitting curve non-decreasing, which has numerous applications including single-index models and probability calibration. When it comes to multi-output regression, the classical IR is no longer applicable because the monotonicity is not readily extendable. We consider a novel multi-output regression problem where a regression function is cyclically monotone. Roughly speaking, a cyclically monotone function is the gradient of some convex potential. Whereas enforcing cyclic monotonicity is apparently challenging, we leverage the fact that Kantorovich's optimal transport (OT) always yields a cyclically monotone coupling as an optimal solution. This perspective naturally allows us to interpret a regression function and the convex potential as a link function in generalized linear models and Brenier's potential in OT, respectively, and hence we call this IR extension Brenier isotonic regression. We demonstrate experiments with probability calibration and generalized linear models. In particular, IR outperforms many famous baselines in probability calibration robustly.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Comparison between IR and BIR . Observations are generated with y=1/(1+exp(−z))+noise . The real line of BIR is computed via the Laguerre map over R .
Table 1: Recalibration results for MLP (upper table) and linear SVM (lower table) . Each number indicates the L1 calibration error (lower is better) with averaging 10 trials, and bold-faced if the recalibrator achieves the best or second best performance or statistically indistinguishable from them by the Mann–Whitney U test (significance level: 5 %).
Figure 3: From left to right, BrenierIR ( k=50 ), Binning , and Matrix Scaling . We show their estimated calibration maps as vector fields (each left) and contour plots of their first coordinate (each right).
Figure 4: Each base model is recalibrated by BIR with different bin size k (shown with the standard deviation).
Table 2: Multiclass classification results. Each number indicates the accuracy and L1 calibration error with averaging 10 trials, and bold-faced if a method achieves the best performance or statistically indistinguishable from the best method by the Mann–Whitney U test (significance level 5 %).
Appendix figures & tables9 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Dataset
Sample size
# of features
# of classes
balance-scale
625
4
3
car
1728
6
4
cleveland
297
13
5
dermatology
358
34
6
glass
214
9
6
segment
2310
19
7
Appendix
Table 3: Dataset details.
Figure 5: Calibration maps of nonparametric recalibrators. The base model is MLP and balance-scale dataset is used. In each row (corresponding to one recalibrator), we show the calibration map (vector field), the first/second/third coordinates of the calibration map, respectively, from left to right.
Figure 6: Calibration maps of parametric recalibrators. The base model is MLP and balance-scale dataset is used. In each row (corresponding to one recalibrator), we show the calibration map (vector field), the first/second/third coordinates of the calibration map, respectively, from left to right.
Figure 7: Calibration maps of nonparametric recalibrators. The base model is naive Bayes and balance-scale dataset is used. In each row (corresponding to one recalibrator), we show the calibration map (vector field), the first/second/third coordinates of the calibration map, respectively, from left to right.
Figure 8: Calibration maps of parametric recalibrators. The base model is naive Bayes and balance-scale dataset is used. In each row (corresponding to one recalibrator), we show the calibration map (vector field), the first/second/third coordinates of the calibration map, respectively, from left to right.
Dataset
# of classes
Sample size
BrenierIR (Ours)
IRP
k=15
k=30
k=50
balance-scale
3
625
3.60
13.69
41.19
0.29
car
4
1728
16.84
50.91
221.91
3.20
cleveland
5
297
4.68
16.52
35.05
4.26
dermatology
6
358
7.17
25.82
57.81
48.52
glass
6
214
4.51
18.26
55.76
7.00
Appendix
Table 4: Averaged running times (in seconds) over 10 trials.
Table 5: Recalibration results for MLP (upper table) and linear SVM (lower table) . Each number indicates accuracy (higher is better) with averaging 10 trials, and bold-faced if the recalibrator achieves the best or second best performance or statistically indistinguishable from them by the Mann–Whitney U test (significance level: 5 %).
Table 6: Recalibration results for MLP (upper table) and linear SVM (lower table) . Each number indicates the classwise calibration error (lower is better) with averaging 10 trials, and bold-faced if the recalibrator achieves the best or second best performance or statistically indistinguishable from them by the Mann–Whitney U test (significance level: 5 %).
Table 7: Recalibration results for MLP (upper table) and linear SVM (lower table) . Each number indicates the confidence calibration error (lower is better) with averaging 10 trials, and bold-faced if the recalibrator achieves the best or second best performance or statistically indistinguishable from them by the Mann–Whitney U test (significance level: 5 %).
Isotonic regression is a canonical tool for estimating monotone functions and calibrating probabilistic predictors. We provide a fully sharp finite-sample characterization of its worst-case degrees of freedom on binary samples. Specifically, we identify the binary sequences that maximize the number of distinct fitted values produced by isotonic regression. We develop a sharp bound on the degrees of freedom with a leading term of (4π2)1/33n2/3 using analytic number theory, improving on previous bounds. We then apply this result to calibration. Calibration is a central requirement for probabilistic prediction, and isotonic regression is a widely used post-processing method for improving calibration. Building on deterministic degrees-of-freedom bounds, we derive, to our knowledge, the first nontrivial distribution-free guarantee on the Expected Calibration Error (ECE) of isotonic regression. This ECE bound is fully model-free and distribution-free, only assuming Y∈{0,1}.
Department of Statistics, University of Chicago · Department of Statistics and Data Science, University of Pennsylvania · Department of Statistics, University of Michigan
Standard regression methods typically optimize a single pointwise objective, such as mean squared error, which conflates the learning of ordering with the learning of scale. This coupling renders models vulnerable to outliers and heavy-tailed noise. We propose CAIRO (Calibrate After Initial Rank Ordering), a framework that decouples regression into two distinct stages. In the first stage, we learn a scoring function by minimizing a scale-invariant ranking loss; in the second, we recover the target scale via isotonic regression. We theoretically characterize a class of "Optimal-in-Rank-Order" objectives -- including variants of RankNet and Gini covariance -- and prove that they recover the ordering of the true conditional mean under mild assumptions. We further show that subsequent monotone calibration recovers the true regression function at the population level and mathematically guarantees that finite-sample predictions are strictly auto-calibrated. Empirically, CAIRO combines the representation learning of neural networks with the robustness of rank-based statistics. It matches the performance of state-of-the-art tree ensembles on tabular benchmarks and significantly outperforms standard regression objectives in regimes with heavy-tailed or heteroskedastic noise.
Harri Vanhems, Yue Zhao, Peng Shi +1
McGill University and Mila · University of York · University of Wisconsin
A point prediction that is well calibrated on average can still be systematically biased conditional on its own value, undermining its use in downstream decision-making. We consider two objectives for reliable uncertainty quantification: self-calibration, requiring a point prediction to be unbiased conditional on its own value, and prediction-conditional validity, requiring a prediction interval to attain nominal coverage conditional on the prediction. Self-Calibrating Conformal Prediction (SC-CP) attains both objectives exactly in finite samples, but requires refitting its calibrator for every candidate outcome, which is computationally prohibitive for continuous outcomes. We propose Isotonic Conformal Prediction (ICP), a framework that decouples calibration from prediction-set construction by fitting a single isotonic recalibration map and constructing prediction intervals within strata of similar recalibrated predictions. Within this framework we develop two procedures. Split Isotonic Conformal Prediction (SICP) attains prediction-conditional validity in finite samples and self-calibration asymptotically, at the computational cost of split conformal prediction. Transductive Isotonic Conformal Prediction (TICP) attains both objectives exactly in finite samples through a per-test-point inner loop that avoids refitting the isotonic calibrator. On synthetic heteroscedastic regression problems and a real-world healthcare-utilization dataset, both procedures match the coverage of SC-CP at substantially lower computational cost.
Daniel Bensimon, Sean Xiang Yu, Eric D. Kolaczyk +1
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, McGill University; Mila · Eli Lilly and Company