stat.MLJun 8, 2026

Decision-Calibrated Conformal Uncertainty for Pacing Decisions in Streaming Advertising

Authors: Prashant Shekhar, Caroline Howard

Abstract

We develop a decision-calibrated conformal framework for pacing decisions in streaming advertising. Pacing depends on uncertain future inventory, demand pressure, incremental response, and member-experience load. Instead of calibrating a generic forecast residual, the framework measures forecast error by its largest impact on the policies that could actually be deployed. The main theorem shows that the proposed score is the smallest valid uncertainty measure that uniformly protects all deployable pacing policies. Geometrically, it is the support function of the signed policy sensitivity set. Split conformal calibration gives finite-sample coverage for this score. A high-dimensional separation theorem shows that traditional residual calibration can be arbitrarily more conservative by paying for nuisance inventory dimensions, and a robust pacing result combines inventory, response, and experience uncertainty. On public-data-calibrated pacing replays built from Criteo Uplift and KuaiRand datasets, traditional conformal pacing remains unresolved with high residual radii of 7236.7 on Criteo and 4629.4 on KuaiRand. With the proposed decision calibration approach, the uncertainty radii are reduced to 18.4 and 278.6 respectively, with separate margins for value, delivery, budget, and member load. On Criteo, the proposed method certifies a less aggressive pacing policy than the point-forecast baseline, and reduces held-out any-violation rate from 16.7% to 3.3%, with zero budget and member-load violations. On KuaiRand, the choice remains unresolved. In a nutshell, the paper establishes that forecasts, response estimates, and member-experience models should be judged by whether they shrink the uncertainty that the pacing decision uses, as this leads to confident decisions that are not overly conservative.

Explore similar work

CardsList
Jul 2, 2026stat.ML

Prediction Sets for Counterfactual Decisions: Coverage, Optimality, and Conformal Prediction

Predictions are increasingly used to guide high-stakes decisions, from treatment selection to policy making. To ensure reliability with imperfect predictions, uncertainty quantification methods such as conformal prediction build prediction sets with coverage guarantees. However, statistical validity alone does not immediately determine the decisions to take, nor the optimality thereof. This gap is especially delicate in counterfactual settings where the outcome that materializes depends on the action taken, so uncertainty cannot be specified independently of the decision rule. We develop a decision-theoretic framework for uncertainty-informed counterfactual decisions. We identify a novel notion of \emph{policy-coupled coverage} -- namely, coverage of the realized outcome under the action induced by the prediction sets themselves -- as the optimal and lossless interface between uncertainty and action. It plays three roles. First, it justifies acting via a natural max-min rule as minimax-optimal under distributional ambiguity. Second, optimizing prediction sets under policy-coupled coverage is equivalent both to a stronger universal-coverage formulation and to the direct risk-averse optimization over policies and utility certificates; this equivalence yields the explicit form of the population-optimal prediction sets. Third, it admits a two-stage procedure, Policy-Coupled Risk-Averse Conformal Prediction (PC-RACP), that approximates these optimal sets with rigorous finite-sample coverage. Simulations and a real email-marketing experiment confirm that PC-RACP delivers higher utility than existing approaches while maintaining valid coverage, and that ignoring the counterfactual structure of the decision problem is suboptimal for both validity and utility.
Yurui Zheng, Ying Jin
Conformal PredictionCounterfactual UtilityOptimal Ergodic CoverageOptimalityGame-Theoretic Mechanisms
AskPDF
Jul 18, 2026stat.ML

Isotonic Conformal Prediction

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
Conformal PredictionCalibrated PredictorsUncertainty QuantificationHeteroskedasticity
AskPDF
Apr 29, 2026cs.LG

ConformaDecompose: Explaining Uncertainty via Calibration Localization

Conformal Prediction provides distribution-free prediction intervals with guaranteed coverage, but its reliance on a single global calibration threshold obscures the sources of uncertainty at the instance level. In particular, it conflates irreducible noise with uncertainty induced by heterogeneous training data (aleatoric), model limitations, or calibration mismatch (epistemic), offering little insight into why an interval is wide or whether it could be reduced. We introduce an uncertainty-aware explainability framework that analyses the reducibility of calibration-induced epistemic conformal uncertainty via progressive calibration localisation for regression tasks. The approach is diagnostic rather than causal: it does not estimate true aleatoric or epistemic uncertainty, but explains how conformal intervals contract and stabilise as calibration support is localised around a test instance. Across benchmarks and real-world data, absolute reducible uncertainty aligns with epistemic proxies, while its relative contribution varies by task, revealing regimes hidden by interval width. This instance-level view complements conformal uncertainty, enhancing interpretability without altering the predictor or coverage.
Fatima Rabia Yapicioglu, Meltem Aksoy, Alberto Rigenti +4
Conformal PredictionPose Uncertainty
AskPDF