Post-Hoc Calibration

Dexterous teleoperation requires reliable human-hand state estimations. However, common low-cost motion-capture gloves and markerless trackers often exhibit biases that vary across users, glove fit, and recording sessions, degrading retargeting and demonstration quality. We present YOCO, a fast few-shot, fine-tuning-free calibration framework that corrects biased hand-pose streams from a small set of paired raw and target poses. Instead of optimizing a separate model for every operator or session, YOCO conditions a calibration HyperNet on the paired examples and predicts LoRA-style updates for a frozen MANO hand-estimation module, turning per-user calibration into a lightweight feed-forward adaptation step while preserving the geometric prior of MANO and the efficiency of a compact estimator. We train YOCO with synthetic drift augmentations on InterHand2.6M and evaluate on augmented InterHand sequences, offline real glove data, and dexterous teleoperation tasks. Across these settings, YOCO improves calibration efficiency, hand-state estimation quality and teleoperation performance compared with uncalibrated input and standard calibration baselines.

Calibration is an essential requirement for probabilistic predictions to be useful for decision making. While state-of-the-art prediction methods often yield miscalibrated predictive distributions, several post-hoc recalibration schemes have been proposed to generate calibrated predictions. However, popular recalibration schemes can conceal miscalibration in specific regions of the outcome space. Since particular outcomes, such as extreme events, often matter most for decision making, probabilistic predictions should be calibrated when evaluation is restricted to these outcomes. Hence, in this paper, we introduce outcome-conditional recalibration, a post-hoc method to recalibrate probabilistic predictions on user-defined regions of the outcome space. The method is simple, easy to implement, and can be applied to arbitrary predictive distributions. It works by applying the quantile recalibration approach of Kuleshov et al. (2018) to forecast conditional distributions, before rescaling these conditional distributions so that forecast event probabilities match empirical occurrence frequencies. This produces valid and continuous predictive distributions that are calibrated within each region of interest. Across regression benchmarks, we demonstrate that existing recalibration schemes do not necessarily yield calibrated predictions when interest is on particular outcomes, and that our approach improves outcome-conditional calibration relative to existing conditional and unconditional recalibration methods, while retaining competitive calibration overall. In an application to day-ahead electricity price forecasting, the approach substantially improves calibration when predicting negative prices, at negligible cost to forecast accuracy.

Mapping post-harvest burned cropland is difficult when fires are small and fragmented and reliable labels are scarce. We developed a calibrated weak-supervision framework for Punjab, India, using Sentinel-2 spectral change, VIIRS active-fire context, and MODIS MCD64A1 as a coarse external calibration and agreement reference. Three pseudo-label recipes, five feature representations, and linear, tree-based, boosted, and neural classifiers were evaluated using nested district-held-out cross-validation over three seeds and five folds. NBR and dNBR were excluded from classifier inputs. The best configuration used the very-strict recipe, a multilayer perceptron, and the full optical feature set (mean Cohen's kappa 0.395, AUROC 0.753, F1 0.747, balanced accuracy 0.703); Random Forest, XGBoost, and LightGBM were practically tied. Higher agreement with held-out pseudo-labels did not establish improved label correctness or independent burned-area accuracy. For deployment, a Random Forest with the very-strict recipe and full optical features was retained. An externally calibrated threshold of 0.60 yielded district-level MODIS agreement of R-squared 0.636, a mapped-to-MODIS burned-area ratio of 1.005, and Spearman correlation of 0.779 with district fire counts. Pixel-level MODIS agreement remained modest (F1 0.205, kappa 0.093). Zero-shot transfer to Haryana was promising (mean kappa 0.641), but Punjab cross-year stability was weak, and Sentinel-1/Sentinel-2 feature concatenation did not improve the optical baseline. Optical observations ended before the seasonal fire context, limiting coverage of late burns. The framework supports district-scale burden assessment and hotspot screening, with limited support for exact scar boundaries or temporally stable annual mapping.

When a classifier is recalibrated from only a few thousand held-out examples, the capacity of the calibration map becomes a statistical design choice rather than a purely architectural one: a scalar map can underfit structured residual miscalibration, while a highly adaptive map can be hard to estimate reliably from so small a split. We disentangle the calibration objective from adaptive capacity and propose signal-routed temperature scaling (SRTS-BCE), a 10-parameter, argmax-preserving calibrator that cross-fits a correctness-risk score over six logit statistics and fits one top-label-BCE temperature per $K=3$ risk groups, recovering TvA-TS as its $K=1$ limit. On fine-tuned CIFAR-100 / ViT-B/16, SRTS-BCE reduces $\mathrm{ECE}_{15}$ from 1.65 (scalar TvA-TS) to 0.96, matching the higher-capacity SMART+BCE head (0.95) at the full calibration budget. The two regimes separate as the budget shrinks: at $n=250$ SRTS-BCE beats SMART+BCE on all three CIFAR-100 backbones (the seed-to-draw hierarchical interval excludes zero), whereas the flagship comparison against the scalar remains directional. A protocol-frozen Tiny-ImageNet follow-up reproduces the small-budget separation and exhibits a budget-dependent ranking reversal on Swin-T; matched routing and map controls show that the effect is tied neither to the learned router nor to discrete grouping. Together the results identify post-hoc calibrator capacity as a finite-sample design choice whose preferred level shifts with the amount of available calibration data.

Depth completion aims to recover dense metric depth from sparse sensor measurements, increasingly leveraging visual foundation models as geometric priors. However, aligning these priors to true metric scale typically relies on rigid affine assumptions in predefined coordinate systems, leaving systematic calibration errors. Linearity in depth calibration depends on the response coordinate. We introduce adaptive response geometry, which makes the fixed choice of depth, log depth, or disparity an image-level unknown. A continuous response family unifies these coordinates and defines an explicit depth-dependent gain. We derive the response-gradient relation and estimate the response parameters in metric space. Hard-Dirichlet residual reconstruction completes the calibrated prior. Under deliberately incomplete metric observations, the training-free pipeline achieves macro AbsRel 0.0301 and macro NMed 14.04°, improving both aggregate measures over PriorDA, LDCM, and Any2Full. Linearity diagnostics examine how the selected response changes the depth relation and its metric error.

Many dense-prediction benchmarks evaluate rare events by pooling prediction and target over spatial blocks, thresholding each, and scoring the contingency table. At a fixed rare operating point, the max-pooled Critical Success Index (CSI) confounds spatial discrimination with amplitude calibration: sharp observations promote many blocks above threshold, while attenuated predictions from squared-error regression leave the same blocks below it. We repurpose classical monotone calibration as a symmetric audit: a post-hoc transform fitted on held-out data and applied separately to each system. The transform cannot reverse pixel ordering, so any contrast it reproduces cannot establish improved spatial ranking. On SEVIR, two released checkpoints of one architecture differ by -29.5% in extreme-threshold CSI before the control and by +5.3% after it. Across 450 pairwise contrasts among 6 systems, the difference in pooled frequency-bias deviation is associated with how far the CSI contrast moves under the control (r = +0.796), and 51 contrasts reverse sign. At CasCast's published extreme-event operating point, the cascade-over-backbone CSI gap falls from 0.1601 to 0.0339, a 78.8% reduction; the remaining gap stays positive. The effect persists when the transform is fitted on a window before the test period, and calibration also reveals advantages hidden by a better-calibrated baseline. On geostationary infrared imagery the relative gain grows as events become rarer, crowd counting reproduces the bias-gain relationship under patch-sum pooling, and semantic segmentation, where frequency bias is already near one, shows little average change. The confound therefore requires both a fixed operating point and a training regime that leaves the output miscalibrated there. We recommend reporting pooled frequency bias and a symmetric held-out FreeKnob Audit alongside rare-event pool-and-threshold scores.

Radiology AI systems increasingly inform clinical decisions such as triage, follow-up imaging, and treatment planning. For these decisions to be made safely, model outputs must be well calibrated, meaning predicted probabilities accurately reflect true risk. Many standard techniques for improving calibration, such as MC Dropout and Deep Ensembles, require access to model parameters or retraining. However, proprietary clinical AI systems operate as black boxes, preventing access to the model's internals. To that end, we propose a model-agnostic framework for improving calibration of black-box models using clinically grounded test-time augmentation (TTA). Our framework applies geometric and physics-inspired 3D CT perturbations and learns probability-level aggregation strategies without access to model internals or the original training data. Across pulmonary embolism and intracranial hemorrhage detection tasks, DualTTA achieved the strongest overall calibration among TTA methods, reducing the Expected Calibration Error by 54% (0.239 -> 0.109) and 43% (0.051 -> 0.029), respectively, while requiring only input-output access. Additionally, DualTTA outperformed uncertainty estimation techniques that require access to model internals, such as Temperature Scaling, MC Dropout, and Deep Ensembles, in most calibration metrics. These results demonstrate that learned TTA aggregation can improve the calibration of clinical AI systems, providing a practical approach for improving the reliability of black-box medical AI.

Post-training often improves task performance but can degrade confidence calibration, leaving post-trained language models (PoLMs) more overconfident than their corresponding pretrained language models (PLMs). Because task-specific labeled calibration data can be costly or unavailable, the corresponding PLM provides a natural label-free reference for post-hoc calibration. Prior agreement-gated PLM-referenced calibration fits a scalar temperature using only examples on which the PoLM and its PLM reference agree, excluding disagreement examples because direct alignment can drive the fitted temperature excessively high and induce under-confidence. We revisit this binary treatment. A controlled reintroduction diagnostic reveals a non monotonic aggregate effect: admitting a moderate fraction of disagreement examples can improve calibration, whereas the benefit diminishes as unit weight inclusion approaches the full disagreement set. We introduce SupportCal, a label-free post-hoc method that retains agreement examples at unit weight and assigns disagreement examples continuous weights based on the own-base PLM's relative support and corroboration from pretrained references selected from a size-compatible candidate pool. We further characterize when the resulting weighted objective admits a finite optimal temperature. Across MedMCQA and MathQA, SupportCal yields lower mean ECE than the agreement-only baseline for nearly all evaluated target-model configurations; supplementary TweetEval Sentiment results show the same pattern on a fixed-label classification task.

Attention-based rerankers score documents by aggregating query-to-document attention and subtracting a null-query calibration pass to remove positional and structural bias. Although widely used, this calibration assumes that the null pass removes irrelevant signal from each document. We show that modern prompt content, e.g. constraints, instructions, personas, and demonstrations can violate this assumption when it enters the scoring readout, making the null pass relevance-aware rather than null. We find that calibration is especially harmful when applied to prompts containing longer, more detailed instructions as the null-pass step removes relevant signal. Based on these findings, we propose interpolated null calibration, a training-free modification that controls how much of the instruction content enters the null baseline. It recovers attention-based reranking performance on instruction-heavy tasks where standard calibration fails, while preserving calibration's benefits when the null pass remains relevance-agnostic. On instruction heavy tasks, the recovered rankings surpass generative rerankers. We also show that in-context demonstrations improve attention-based reranking with little calibration interference, since demonstrations act only through the query pass and leave the null pass unchanged.

Test-time prompt tuning (TPT) enables adaptation on a single test instance, achieving improved accuracy but often sacrificing calibration performance. Most existing calibration methods introduce additional regularization terms to promote dispersion across text embeddings and reduce calibration error, yet these methods often suffer from a drop in accuracy. Motivated by the well-calibrated nature of zero-shot predictions, we propose CoTS, a simple yet effective post-hoc calibration method that preserves accuracy. Specifically, CoTS applies temperature scaling to minimize the confidence gap between adapted and zero-shot predictions. To fully exploit the potential of multiple augmentations during adaptation, we introduce a weak-strong ensemble strategy that further boosts accuracy. We then apply CoTS to this ensemble, termed E-CoTS, to maintain its well-calibrated property. Extensive experiments on diverse datasets and backbones show that our approaches effectively mitigate miscalibration without compromising primary accuracy. For instance, E-CoTS reduces the average expected calibration error of TPT from 11.90% to 5.38% on ImageNet variants, while even increasing accuracy from 60.74% to 62.95%. Moreover, when integrated with existing calibration methods, E-CoTS usually enhances both accuracy and calibration simultaneously.

Shortcut learning denotes the widespread situation in which a classifier exploits spurious correlations rather than diagnostic features. Existing mitigation strategies mostly aim to learn shortcut-invariant representations; their empirical success is limited and they cannot be applied to classifiers using frozen foundation model encoders. We propose to reframe shortcut learning as fundamentally a calibration problem: unconstrained learning implicitly calibrates each shortcut group to its training set disease prevalence, rendering the resulting classifier necessarily over-confident in one group and under-confident in the other. Building on this insight, we prevalence-equalize calibration between shortcut groups through two encoder-agnostic methods, an in-processing regularizer and a post-hoc prevalence-equalized recalibration step. Across chest-drain-pneumothorax benchmarks on CheXpert and SIIM-ACR, spanning fine-tuned CNNs and frozen foundation-model backbones, both methods substantially outperform all baselines. Post-hoc recalibration of a standard ERM-trained DenseNet raises misaligned-group AUROC from 0.23 to 0.73, indicating that shortcut reliance degrades the classification head rather than the underlying representation. Besides two new state-of-the-art shortcut mitigation approaches, our findings more fundamentally connect shortcut learning to calibration theory and algorithmic fairness.

Post-hoc calibration corrects reported confidence, yet a multiclass calibrator can also change the associated top-1 prediction. Accuracy captures only the net effect of these changes on correctness, not how often predictions change; the Top-1 Prediction Change Rate (TPCR) instead measures this frequency. We propose Calibrator-Output Repair for Top-1 Decision Preservation (CORD), the first post-fit adapter to impose exact prediction preservation by repairing the full calibrated probability vector. From the original and calibrated outputs alone, CORD determines the mass assigned to the original top-1. The calibrated conditional distribution allocates the remaining mass over the other classes, yielding a repaired vector whose own argmax recovers the original prediction. On the calibration split, CORD coordinates the repaired masses to retain the calibrated outputs' mean mass on original predictions whenever attainable. The adapter alters neither the fitted calibrator nor its direct output, fits no additional supervised map, and requires no user- or validation-tuned hyperparameter. Across CIFAR-10/100 and ImageNet-1K, CORD attains zero TPCR by construction and lowers mean ECE, NLL, and Brier relative to the corresponding direct outputs in every dataset; paired gains persist under distribution shift and across calibration-set sizes. CORD thus removes the preservation constraint from calibrator fitting and assigns exact recovery of the original decision to subsequent output repair. Our code is available at https://github.com/labhai/CORD.

Geometric eye trackers can provide the spatial accuracy required for gaze-based interaction and multimodal studies, but their measurements remain sensitive to residual session-specific calibration error. Research on correcting this error is difficult to compare because methods are typically evaluated with different devices, target layouts, and error definitions. We present a calibration-focused dataset containing 163 trials from 12 participants, with separate 18-point fitting and 32-point test grids, and use it to evaluate global, local, and composite correction functions under a common spatial-extrapolation protocol. We further introduce a lightweight neural refiner that combines ranked predictions from complementary calibrators. On this controlled dataset, post-vendor correction reduces the mean angular error from $1.53^\circ$ to $1.03^\circ$ with the strongest classical composite and to $0.96^\circ$ with the refiner. In a closed-loop gaze task, lower residual error is associated with higher performance across four online correction conditions. These results provide a reproducible data-quality benchmark for using gaze as a behavioral signal in interactive modeling.

Online log anomaly detection is critical for maintaining the reliability of large-scale computing systems. Although recent language model-based log anomaly detectors achieve strong detection performance, their confidence estimates remain poorly calibrated. We show that these detectors frequently assign excessive confidence to incorrect predictions, particularly for anomalous logs under severe class imbalance. Moreover, confidence on erroneous predictions remains persistently high even when conventional calibration metrics indicate good calibration, creating a critical reliability gap for operational monitoring systems. To address this issue, we propose Log Reconstruction and Distance (LoRD), a lightweight post-hoc calibration framework for reliable log anomaly detection. LoRD learns prediction-route-specific reliability models from latent representations of correctly classified validation samples and estimates prediction reliability through route-wise reconstruction distances. Based on the estimated reliability, LoRD selectively recalibrates high-risk predictions to suppress overconfident errors while preserving reliable predictions. Extensive experiments on four large-scale log benchmark datasets and multiple language model-based detectors demonstrate that LoRD consistently improves confidence reliability and substantially reduces overconfident anomaly-related errors without sacrificing anomaly detection performance.

Web search, product search, and question-answering retrieval systems often assign a relevance label and confidence score to each query-candidate pair. The relevance label describes how well a page, product, or passage matches the query, while the confidence often guides downstream use or fallback decisions. Post-hoc calibration is therefore needed because misaligned confidence can make systems over-trust wrong predictions or unnecessarily defer correct ones. However, calibration mainly aligns confidence with average correctness, and does not remove predicted-label-dependent reliability differences that remain within the same calibrated confidence level. We address this gap with Label-wise Monotone Reliability Projection (MRP), which learns label-wise monotone functions that map calibrated confidence to correctness reliability while preserving the original predicted labels and class probabilities. The resulting reliability score reranks fixed predictions according to residual risk. Across six information access relevance datasets and multiple post-hoc calibrators, MRP improves reliability reranking and average fallback utility while preserving full-coverage accuracy and ECE. Structural ablations show that the main gains come from label-wise residual reliability rather than from global confidence remapping. We further analyze when MRP reliability scores can be embedded back into top-label probability geometry, showing that this projection is useful as a compatibility analysis but is distinct from the main reliability-reranking objective. The implementation will be made publicly available.

Post-hoc calibration aligns a classifier's predicted confidences with its empirical accuracy without retraining. An ideal calibrator should correct nonlinear miscalibration, scale gracefully to large label spaces, and preserve the original predictions; existing methods typically violate at least one of these properties---temperature scaling lacks expressivity, more flexible parametric alternatives introduce parameters that grow with the number of classes $C$, and other expressive methods do not preserve the rank ordering of class scores and may alter the predicted class. We propose \textbf{Invertible Logits Transformation (InvLT)}, which applies a learned scalar MLP $f:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}$ element-wise to the pre-softmax logits. Sharing $f$ across all logit dimensions makes the parameter count independent of $C$. Monotonicity of $f$---and hence preservation of the argmax prediction---is softly encouraged via a paired inverse network rather than enforced through the numerical integration required by prior monotone calibrators; this avoids their computational overhead while empirically preserving the original classification accuracy in every setting we evaluate. Across standard image classification benchmarks and a range of architectures, InvLT consistently outperforms a broad set of post-hoc baselines on standard calibration metrics.

Human-centered assessment tasks, which are essential for systematic decision-making, rely heavily on human judgment and typically lack verifiable ground truth. Existing approaches face a dilemma: methods using only human judgments suffer from heterogeneous expertise and inconsistent rating scales, while methods using only model-generated scores must learn from imperfect proxies or incomplete features. We propose Aggregate-then-Calibrate (AtC), a two-stage framework that combines these complementary sources. Stage-1 aggregates heterogeneous comparative judgments into a consensus ranking using a rank-aggregation model that accounts for annotator reliability. Stage-2 calibrates any predictive model's scores by an isotonic projection onto the order, enforcing ordinal consistency while preserving as much of the model's quantitative information as possible. Theoretically, we show: (1) modeling annotator heterogeneity yields strictly more efficient consensus estimation than homogeneity; (2) isotonic calibration enjoys risk bounds even when the consensus ranking is misspecified; and (3) AtC asymptotically outperforms model-only assessment. Across semi-synthetic and real-world datasets, AtC consistently improves accuracy and robustness over human-only or model-only assessments. Our results bridge judgment aggregation with model-free calibration, providing a principled recipe for human-centered assessment when ground truth is costly, scarce, or unverifiable.

Deep learning based object detectors require trustworthiness beyond competitive detection performance, but deep neural networks are prone to overconfident predictions, assigning high confidence scores to predictions that are likely to be inaccurate. To improve the alignment between confidence scores and prediction accuracy, existing methods calibrate confidence scores based on box-level localization, such as precision or intersection over union with the ground truth bounding box. However, box-level localization reflects only a measure of agreement between the predicted box and the ground truth, resulting in calibrated confidence scores for box-level accuracy failing to capture the localization accuracy of coordinates of box. To tackle this issue, we propose a novel post-hoc calibration framework, rethinking detection calibration (ReDC), which provides reliable coordinate-level confidence scores, including directional information. The proposed framework defines coordinate-wise alignment and deviation direction between predictions and ground truth. Based on the alignment measure, confidence re-encoding produces reliable coordinate-level confidence scores, while directional displacement estimation predicts coordinate-wise deviation directions. Extensive experiments under in-domain and out-domain scenarios demonstrate that the proposed approach expresses the coordinate-wise localization of detected objects more precisely than existing methods. Furthermore, our method covers the representational scope of prior calibration approaches by aggregating coordinate-level confidence scores into box-level localization.

YOLO-Pose models provide efficient keypoint localization, but do not quantify the associated spatial uncertainty. We introduce a lightweight post-hoc probabilistic extension that augments a trained YOLO-Pose model with calibrated bivariate predictive distributions over keypoint locations, centered at the model's original predictions. Concretely, we train additional probabilistic heads with an importance-weighted negative log-likelihood to predict an input-dependent $2\times2$ dispersion matrix for each keypoint, followed by Gaussian calibration for broad downstream compatibility or Student-$t$ calibration for distributional fidelity. Complementing this, we propose an evaluation protocol that combines a suite of distributional calibration diagnostics with average keypoint precision (AKP), a keypoint-level extension of the COCO AP protocol for assessing reliability rankings. Experiments on COCO show that the learned uncertainty estimates enable effective keypoint-level reliability ranking, Student-$t$ calibration best captures the empirical residual distribution, and uncertainty-based pruning removes unreliable keypoints. A central application-level demonstration is vision-based aircraft landing, where calibrated covariances for runway keypoints support uncertainty-aware aircraft position estimation and downstream sensor fusion.

The soft-label Bayes-error estimator beta(z) = E[min(z, 1-z)] of Ishida et al. estimates the irreducible error of a binary task directly from probability-valued labels. Recent work by Ushio et al. showed that this estimator is fragile when the probabilities are not the true posterior: even perfectly calibrated soft labels can yield a substantially inaccurate estimate, and they propose isotonic calibration as a consistent remedy. We complement that line of work by characterizing exactly how the most widely used post-hoc calibration map -- temperature scaling -- distorts the proxy. We prove an exact, model-free identity reducing the temperature-scaled proxy to the classifier's margin distribution, from which we obtain (i) strict monotonicity in the temperature and (ii) a continuous bijection from the temperature axis onto the open interval (0, 1/2), so that a fixed classifier -- with fixed decisions and fixed 0-1 error -- can be made to report any proxy value whatsoever. Under a Gaussian model of the logits we further derive a two-parameter closed form for the entire proxy-versus-temperature curve. Across CIFAR-10, Fashion-MNIST, and SVHN (eight binary tasks), the proxy varies by 56x to 980x at constant test error, the closed form reproduces the empirical curve to within 0.018, and the calibration temperature that minimizes the expected calibration error does not coincide with any stable proxy value. Our results give a precise, predictive account of the distortion whose existence motivates calibration-based remedies, and they reinforce the practical recommendation that a proxy value is meaningful only together with the mechanism that produced its probabilities.

Temperature scaling is the dominant post-hoc calibration method in modern deep learning. Its theoretical justification rests on an assumption that is rarely stated explicitly: that ground-truth labels are one-hot and deterministic. In practice, labels are frequently soft, crowd-sourced, or genuinely distributional, reflecting real disagreement among human annotators rather than annotation noise. We study whether temperature scaling retains its calibration properties when this assumption is violated, and whether any resulting degradation depends on model scale. Using CIFAR-10H and ChaosNLI, two publicly available datasets with human-annotated soft label distributions, we evaluate three model scales per modality under both hard one-hot and soft distributional label targets. Across all nine configurations we find a positive soft-label calibration gap: temperature scaling calibrated on hard labels consistently underperforms an oracle calibrated directly on soft labels, with Brier Score gaps ranging from 0.002 to 0.134. The gap grows monotonically with model scale in the vision domain and on the SNLI-derived split of ChaosNLI, and is substantially larger in the language domain (mean gap 0.079) than in vision (mean gap 0.003). A scale-ordering reversal on the MNLI-derived split remains after matched-domain training; we treat it as inconclusive for the scale hypothesis and attribute it primarily to near-chance accuracy on that split. As a second post-hoc baseline, multiclass isotonic regression yields the same qualitative conclusion: positive soft-label gaps in all nine configurations, and larger gaps in language than in vision. These findings suggest that calibration protocols built on majority-vote labels systematically misstate model reliability wherever label ambiguity is structural, with direct consequences for deployment in safety-critical settings.

Post-hoc calibration is widely adopted to correct probability estimates from trained classifiers, yet most evaluations report aggregate performance without testing whether that performance holds across distinct operating conditions within a single dataset. We present a pre-registered, condition-stratified robustness analysis comparing temperature scaling (TEMP) and isotonic regression (ISO) across four controlled conditions (C1--C4). Four hypothesis groups are evaluated: discrimination deltas with Holm-corrected multiplicity control (H1), Brier score differences (H2), calibration slope outcomes (H3), and AUROC differences under best-condition setups (H4). TEMP-minus-ISO discrimination deltas remain small across all conditions (-0.0155 to 0.0139), with Holm-adjusted p-values of 0.9895 everywhere. TEMP Brier differences are consistently negative (C1: -0.0002 through C4: -0.0074), while ISO shows sign reversals. TEMP calibration slopes stay closer to unity in every condition (range 0.7597--0.9493) than ISO slopes (0.1364--0.2726). AUROC differences shift from near zero in C1 (-0.0004) to positive in C4 (0.0264). These results establish that in-dataset robustness is condition-dependent and metric-specific. No claim of external transportability is made.

Detection models running in adversarial environments face a malicious distribution that drifts rapidly while the benign distribution stays comparatively stable, so teams retrain and redeploy constantly to stay ahead of new threats. Retraining tends to change the output prediction scores, which breaks downstream users of the model. For these security-oriented models we need consistent false-positive rate (FPR) across all output values, whereas standard probability-calibration methods target class probability rather than an FPR contract. We introduce a method built on top of existing calibration primitives that targets the whole FPR curve, giving scores a consistent FPR meaning across deployments. On one held-out split, the observed relative FPR error was at most 2.3% from 10% down to 0.1% FPR and 7.2% at 0.01% FPR. The shipped artifact remains under 200 KB in measurements across calibration sets from 1K to 10M benign samples.

Monocular depth foundations predict domain-general relative depth but lack absolute scale; a handful of sparse metric anchors from a range sensor can calibrate them to metric depth, an attractive alternative to metric-supervised training. Existing sparse-anchor calibration methods, however, assume the anchors are clean, whereas real sensors produce outliers that are present with the wrong value -- time-of-flight multipath, mixed pixels -- not merely missing. We show that the established residual-on-CFA calibration recipe collapses under such outliers, and that the strongest publicly deployed method, VI-Depth, has a structural multipath blind spot: robust to missing anchors, it falls behind an unprotected baseline on three of four datasets when anchors are present but wrong. We propose Multipath-Robust Anchor Calibration (MRAC), a parameter-free, inference-time wrapper that gates anchors by foundation consistency -- a Theil--Sen fit and a median-absolute-deviation test against the foundation's own relative-depth ordering -- before a single call to the calibration head. MRAC adds no learned parameters, runs its selection in $\approx 50\,μ$s on CPU, and serves anchor budgets $K \in [5,200]$ from one checkpoint. On a $320$-cell benchmark with a same-backbone, same-architecture control, MRAC strictly wins $84\%$ of same-backbone cells across all four outlier families and, against VI-Depth, wins all twelve corrupted multipath cells and all sixteen KITTI cells, reducing KITTI multipath AbsRel by $3.2\times$ ($0.489$ to $0.151$) at zero retraining.

Reliable confidence estimates are essential in semantic segmentation, yet modern models often remain miscalibrated. We investigate two overlooked issues in post-hoc calibration. First, adding a constant to all logits leaves softmax probabilities unchanged, but several standard calibrators depend on this arbitrary offset. In segmentation, this offset can vary across pixels or voxels, introducing spatially varying representation dependence. We characterize translation-invariant (TI) calibrators and construct TI counterparts of shift-sensitive methods. Second, calibrating with cross-entropy can degrade segmentation quality due to mismatched training and calibration objectives and limited calibration data. We investigate decision-preserving calibration under argmax- and order-preservation constraints. Since these constraints restrict affine softmax calibrators to temperature scaling, we introduce more expressive class-conditional affine calibrators that preserve decisions. Across natural-image and medical segmentation benchmarks, including corruption-based covariate shift, TI variants generally improve calibration, while decision-preserving variants prevent segmentation degradation by construction and retain strong calibration performance. Our findings provide practical design principles for post-hoc calibration in semantic segmentation.

Resampling methods such as SMOTE and random under/over-sampling are standard tools for class-imbalanced classification, almost always evaluated by minority-class accuracy or F1. Prior work has established that undersampling degrades probability calibration by distorting the training prior [1]. We extend this lens to synthetic oversampling (SMOTE) and provide a practical, evidence-based guide to when calibration damage matters and how to fix it. Across five public datasets (imbalance ratio 1.9-70) and two ensemble models (random forest, gradient boosting), with ten seeds and paired statistics, we find: (1) SMOTE's calibration cost is real but small (ECE +0.009; Cliff's delta = +0.27, small-to-moderate) across the studied imbalance range (IR 1.9-70) and its discrimination gains typically outweigh the calibration penalty; (2) random undersampling is the genuine danger -- its damage grows sharply with imbalance, inflating ECE from 0.008 to 0.395 on a dataset with ratio 70, largely because the resulting training sets are too small to estimate probabilities reliably; (3) a single post-hoc recalibration step (Platt or isotonic) eliminates the damage, reducing ECE by up to 66% at a negligible ranking-power cost (AUC -0.002, Cliff's delta = -0.07); and (4) the analytic prior-shift correction that repairs undersampling does not transfer to SMOTE, because SMOTE distorts the class-conditional density rather than only the prior -- so data-driven recalibration remains necessary. We recommend that imbalanced-learning studies report calibration alongside discrimination, and that practitioners recalibrate after resampling whenever predicted probabilities drive decisions.

Reward models for Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) pool preferences across thousands of annotators and fit one global affine calibrator, collapsing raters with systematically different rating-scale offsets and slopes into a single average-rater fit that does not match any individual annotator. PEBS is a per-rater empirical-Bayes shrinkage estimator: it fits per-rater affine calibrators on a held-out slice of each annotator's ratings and applies Morris-James-Stein empirical-Bayes shrinkage toward the population mean, in closed form and without retraining the reward model. On PRISM, PEBS reduces within-user held-out RMSE by 8.58% over the pooled population-slope baseline. The procedure replicates on PluriHarms harm ratings (Qwen-2.5 base, in-family) with a +9.66% RMSE reduction over the same population-slope baseline. PEBS is a closed-form post-hoc estimator for annotator-specific affine calibration in RLHF reward modeling; it leaves the reward base model unchanged and estimates only the rater-level map used at inference time for new ratings.

Deep neural networks often produce poorly calibrated confidence estimates, overstating their certainty even when predictions are incorrect. Temperature Scaling remains the most widely used posthoc calibration method due to its simplicity and effectiveness, yet its global, uniform rescaling of logits fails to correct the highly heterogeneous structure of miscalibration observed across the confidence spectrum. In particular, the largest correctness confidence discrepancies arise in different quantile regions depending on the setting, low confidence predictions, where uncertainty matters most, tend to exhibit the largest correctness confidence discrepancies, which standard TS leaves largely unaddressed. We introduce Quantile Adaptive Temperature Scaling (QaTS), a simple and efficient post hoc calibration method that adapts the temperature as a function of a predictions empirical confidence quantile. By mapping confidences into the quantile space, QaTS normalizes the calibration problem, makes the structure of miscalibration explicit and enables a monotone temperature function that adapts across quantiles while leaving well calibrated high confidence predictions largely unchanged. preserving high confidence behavior. This quantile aware formulation aligns naturally with a reparameterized Expected Calibration Error (ECE) objective and yields a sample wise temperature that is robust across a variety of challenging scenarios, such as class imbalance and distributional shifts. Across a broad range of datasets, architectures, evaluation scenarios and diverse tasks, QaTS consistently, and substantially, outperforms state of the art post hoc calibration methods, delivering more reliable and trustworthy confidence estimates without modifying model predictions.

Pose-flow video anomaly detectors are attractive for one-class surveillance because they provide likelihood-based rankings for tracked skeleton windows. However, a single likelihood score may hide multimodal normal behavior and be sensitive to pose-observation noise. We study a frozen-detector setting in which the pose-flow backbone, cached skeleton tracks, and evaluation pipeline are fixed. Reliability-Aware Prototype Calibration (RPC) is a post-hoc score calibration method for this setting. It adds a standardized nearest-prototype deviation in the frozen latent space to the standardized flow score, and uses keypoint confidence only to gate this added geometric evidence. Thus, RPC preserves the original density signal while correcting the ranking with empirical normal-mode structure under pose reliability. Across two frozen pose-flow backbones and four datasets, RPC improves frame-level AUROC in all eight backbone-dataset pairs, with gains ranging from 0.34 to 4.49 percentage points and averaging 2.03 points. Ablation and reliability analyses show that prototype deviation is the main corrective signal, while reliability gating is most useful when pose observations are less trustworthy. These results suggest that lightweight post-hoc calibration can strengthen cached pose-flow systems when retraining or reproducing the full pose pipeline is impractical.

Temporal classification errors are often treated as representation failures, but they can also arise from how available evidence is converted into decisions. This paper proposes a representation--calibration decomposition for temporal classification. We keep a trained native classifier frozen and separate two inference-time interventions: a conservative residual multi-scale branch that adds auxiliary logits to the native prediction, and a post-hoc branch-aware calibrator that recombines native and residual evidence at decision time. This design distinguishes missing temporal evidence from underused decision-level evidence without retraining the backbone. Across FI-2010, PTB-XL, UCI-HAR, MHEALTH, and HARTH, we find that gains are strongly regime-dependent. Residual multi-scale evidence is most useful in noisy or representation-limited settings, especially short-horizon FI-2010 and weaker recurrent backbones, while branch-aware calibration helps when native and auxiliary logits contain complementary evidence not fully exploited by the raw decision rule. Near-saturated settings show limited gains from either intervention. These results suggest that temporal classification should be understood not only as representation learning, but also as the problem of trusting, combining, and calibrating evidence from multiple views.