Mixed-Prior Decision Risk for Open-Set Recognition

Open-set recognition systems face a neglected failure mode: high-confidence near-known unknowns, which lie outside the known label set but are close enough to known classes that a closed-set classifier accepts them with high confidence. We show that this failure is widespread across scalar-threshold methods, including recent post-hoc detectors, and that stronger encoders can amplify rather than remove the risk. We propose EGUR-A, which changes the decision from is this sample's score high enough?'' to does this predicted known class have sufficient evidence to accept this sample?'' EGUR-A combines class-conditional local acceptance evidence with global residual evidence, and selects their relative weight from known-sample statistics without unknown validation data. Across CUB, FGVC-Aircraft, and ImageNet-hard, EGUR-A substantially reduces high-confidence false known acceptance at matched known-rejection operating points. The result is not a stronger threshold; it is a different question: whether a known class is entitled to accept a sample.

Open-set recognition (OSR) requires a classifier to reject inputs from unseen classes which is essential in safety-critical settings such as medical imaging. Simplex based methods, which fix class prototypes at the vertices of a regular simplex and then reject via a distance-ratio score, perform well empirically but lack theoretical justification, and existing analysis applies only when the embedding dimension d is at least C-1, which is the regime in which a regular simplex exists. We give a theoretical account of simplex-ratio OSR that holds in every embedding dimension, including d < C-1. Our analysis centers on balanced equal-norm codes: prototype configurations with equal lengths and zero sum, which exist for all d >= 2 and include the regular simplex as a special case. For these codes we show that an auxiliary squared ratio score has sublevel sets that are exact unions of Euclidean balls, which in turn bracket the acceptance region of the operational score; and we prove a sharp dichotomy: the prototypes attain one-distance symmetry, behaving like a regular simplex, if and only if d >= C-1, with controlled degradation governed by an explicit defect parameter below that threshold. We further show the false-acceptance rate decays exponentially in d under natural isotropy assumptions, and that the operational score is globally Lipschitz with compact acceptance regions. Empirically, we study balanced prototype geometry as both an analytic tool and a representation-learning prior, rather than as a stand-alone state-of-the-art detector. Across CIFAR and MedMNIST open-set splits, the geometry provides useful structure, but OSR performance remains strongly dependent on the scoring rule: raw ratio scores typically underperform nearest-neighbor and logit-based alternatives.

Current evaluation of epistemic uncertainty relies on tasks such as out-ofdistribution detection and active learning. However, the Bayes-optimal decision strategies for these tasks do not coincide with the scores commonly used to quantify epistemic uncertainty. Building on the epistemic reject-option framework, we evaluate epistemic uncertainty using its ability to identify regret, the reducible error. Formulating selective prediction as a constrained optimization over coverage, expected risk, and regret, we prove the optimal selector is a thresholded convex combination of the ground-truth aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties. This theoretical unification exposes a weakness in recent uncertainty disentanglement literature: we demonstrate that standard correlation metrics between learned components do not necessarily predict their actual operational utility. We instead propose to evaluate the achievable risk, regret, coverage surface of the decomposition as a diagnostic for joint disentanglement and utility. Benchmarking standard methods on datasets with dense human annotations reveals that decision-theoretic rankings can disagree substantially with proxy-task rankings, including pairwise rank inversions between methods that are top-ranked on one criterion and bottom-ranked on other.