Symbolic regression (SR) is a class of methods that systematically explore the space of mathematical functions to discover models that accurately capture the underlying relationships in a dataset. Despite recent advances in the field, a lack of support for uncertainty quantification (UQ) limits its adoption in real-world decision processes. In regression analysis, UQ provides important information about the model reliability, which can both help to avoid overfitting by accounting for uncertainty in the data, and provide insights for decision-making. This survey is the first to clearly address this issue, with the objective of introducing essential UQ concepts and reviewing the current literature on UQ in SR, which can be broadly organized into three research directions: frequentist, Bayesian, and model selection. Despite its importance, UQ in SR is still underexplored, which motivates further research into reliable UQ methods for SR.
Uncertainty quantification is crucial in machine learning, yet most (axiomatic) studies of uncertainty measures focus on classification, leaving a gap in regression settings with limited formal justification and evaluations. In this work, we provide a formal way of representing uncertainty in continuous space, using a general parametric formulation, allowing for tractable analysis and evaluation of uncertainty measures. Within this framework, we propose a set of axioms that enable rigorous assessment of total, aleatoric, and epistemic uncertainty measures. Together, this allows for a theoretical examination of uncertainty measures and their corresponding properties. As a specific example, we compare the widely used entropy- and variance-based measures with respect to established predictive models and analyze their limitations and challenges in uncertainty quantification. Our work provides a principled way to understand and develop uncertainty measures in supervised regression, offering theoretical insights and practical guidelines for reliable uncertainty assessment.
Symbolic regression (SR) has gained recent traction in AI-driven scientific discovery for learning closed-form physical laws. Yet existing methods are dominated by heuristic search or data-intensive approaches that often assume low-noise regimes and lack principled uncertainty quantification, while fully probabilistic SR formulations remain scarce. We introduce a scalable probabilistic framework for SR, VaSST, based on variational inference. VaSST uses soft symbolic trees, a continuous relaxation of symbolic expression trees in which discrete operator and feature assignments are replaced by probability distributions over allowable components. This transforms combinatorial symbolic search through an astronomically large expression space into efficient gradient-based optimization while preserving a coherent probabilistic interpretation. The learned soft representations induce posterior distributions over symbolic structures, enabling uncertainty quantification across plausible symbolic forms through posterior-aware symbolic model selection. On simulated experiments and the Feynman Symbolic Regression Database, VaSST achieves strong structural recovery and predictive accuracy compared to state-of-the-art competing SR methods.
Uncertainty quantification (UQ) is essential for reliable decision-making in safety-critical applications in probabilistic machine learning. For regression problems, dominant scalar UQ approaches - notably, those based on proper scoring rules - measure uncertainty via pointwise predictive risk. This can lead to counterintuitive results when the target statistic is not the conditional expectation. We propose an alternative framework, in which uncertainty is characterised by the volume of the most probable subset of a distribution's support. QUEST (Quantifying Uncertainty via highest dEnSiTy regions) is a novel approach to UQ based on the concentration of Lebesgue measure at a distribution's peak(s), evaluated at one or more values of a robustness parameter α. We establish connections between our measures and classical statistics from information theory and economics. We show that, unlike popular alternatives based on proper scoring rules, QUEST measures of epistemic and aleatoric uncertainty satisfy a set of axioms adapted from the UQ literature, including monotonicity under distributional spread and invariance to location shifts. Selective prediction benchmarks confirm that QUEST performs favourably against standard measures such as variance and differential entropy.