About: Artificial intelligence (AI) is nowadays included into an increasing number of critical systems. Inclusion of AI in such systems may, however, pose a risk, since it is, still, infeasible to build AI systems that know how to function well in situations that differ greatly from what the AI has seen before. Therefore, it is crucial that future AI systems have the ability to not only function well in known domains, but also understand and show when they are uncertain when facing something unknown. In this paper, we evaluate four different methods that have been proposed to correctly quantifying uncertainty when the AI model is faced with new samples. We investigate the behaviour of these models when they are applied to samples far from what these models have seen before, and if they correctly attribute those samples with high uncertainty. We also examine if incorrectly classified samples are attributed with an higher uncertainty than correctly classified samples. The major finding from this simple experiment is, surprisingly, that the evaluated methods capture the uncertainty differently and the correlation between the quantified uncertainty of the models is low. This inconsistency is something that needs to be further understood and solved before AI can be used in critical applications in a trustworthy and safe manner.   Goto Sponge  NotDistinct  Permalink

An Entity of Type : fabio:Abstract, within Data Space : covidontheweb.inria.fr associated with source document(s)

AttributesValues
type
value
  • Artificial intelligence (AI) is nowadays included into an increasing number of critical systems. Inclusion of AI in such systems may, however, pose a risk, since it is, still, infeasible to build AI systems that know how to function well in situations that differ greatly from what the AI has seen before. Therefore, it is crucial that future AI systems have the ability to not only function well in known domains, but also understand and show when they are uncertain when facing something unknown. In this paper, we evaluate four different methods that have been proposed to correctly quantifying uncertainty when the AI model is faced with new samples. We investigate the behaviour of these models when they are applied to samples far from what these models have seen before, and if they correctly attribute those samples with high uncertainty. We also examine if incorrectly classified samples are attributed with an higher uncertainty than correctly classified samples. The major finding from this simple experiment is, surprisingly, that the evaluated methods capture the uncertainty differently and the correlation between the quantified uncertainty of the models is low. This inconsistency is something that needs to be further understood and solved before AI can be used in critical applications in a trustworthy and safe manner.
Subject
  • Dimensionless numbers
  • Covariance and correlation
  • Polytheism
part of
is abstract of
is hasSource of
Faceted Search & Find service v1.13.91 as of Mar 24 2020


Alternative Linked Data Documents: Sponger | ODE     Content Formats:       RDF       ODATA       Microdata      About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data]
OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3229 as of Jul 10 2020, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Single-Server Edition (94 GB total memory)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software