How and why does deep ensemble coupled with transfer learning increase performance in bipolar disorder and schizophrenia classification?

In resource-constrained and low-latency settings, uncertainty estimates must be efficiently obtained. Deep Ensembles provide robust epistemic uncertainty (EU) but require training multiple full-size models. BatchEnsemble aims to deliver ensemble-like EU at far lower parameter and memory cost by applying learned rank-1 perturbations to a shared base network. We show that BatchEnsemble not only underperforms Deep Ensembles but closely tracks a single model baseline in terms of accuracy, calibration and out-of-distribution (OOD) detection on CIFAR10/10C/SVHN. A controlled study on MNIST finds members are near-identical in function and parameter space, indicating limited capacity to realize distinct predictive modes. Thus, BatchEnsemble behaves more like a single model than a true ensemble.

This paper tackles visible challenges in deep ensemble learning, where deep neural networks serve as ensemble members: training and storage burdens, and robustness of cautious (set-valued) predictions targeting multiple utilities, which may involve reward-sensitivity. To mitigate the training and storage burdens, we propose to employ compact ensembles, such as Bayesian Neural Networks and Convolutional Neural Networks with the Monte-Carlo dropout prediction option, to produce probabilistic predictions. For each query instance, these probabilistic predictions are then used to define a representative distribution optimizing some statistical distance. The representative distribution is then employed to define the Bayes-optimal prediction (BOP) of any utility. To address the potential unrobustness of singleton prediction making, we propose a family of set-utilities satisfying some desirable properties and whose set-valued BOPs can be found efficiently. Empirical evidence is then given to illustrate the potential (dis)advantages of the proposed ensemble learning framework.

As AI models move toward clinical decision-making and personalized treatment, understanding what a model learns is important beyond predictive accuracy alone. We investigate whether personalized latent dynamics reveal clinically associated differences even when predictive fit is similar. A lightweight CNN--Transformer EEG foundation model pretrained on the Temple University EEG Corpus (TUEG) extracts segment-level representations. Using the Temple University Epilepsy Corpus (TUEP), representations are mapped to a shared latent-state space, and sparse multinomial logistic transition distributions (mLTD) are fit independently to each subject to obtain personalized transition-dependency graphs $W_n$. Analyses include $n{=}198$ subjects (99 epilepsy / 99 non-epilepsy). At $k{=}4$, epilepsy subjects exhibit substantially denser learned dependency structure ($p{=}1.1\times10^{-7}$), with the same pattern at $k{=}6$ (19.90 vs. 13.46; $p{=}5.2\times10^{-5}$). Graph-derived features provide moderate group discrimination under 5-fold subject-wise cross-validation (AUROC 0.68 at $k{=}4$; 0.65 at $k{=}6$). In contrast, held-out log-likelihood is nearly identical between groups at $k{=}4$ ($-0.992$ vs. $-0.991$; $p{=}0.95$), with similarly matched next-state prediction (AUROC 0.855 vs. 0.861; $p{=}0.54$). Thus, similar predictive fit does not imply similar learned dynamics: groups can be comparably predictable while differing substantially in the internal dynamical structure learned by personalized models. This distinction motivates evaluating learned structure alongside predictive performance in personalized clinical models.