The accurate estimation of predictive uncertainty carries importance in medical scenarios such as lung node segmentation. Unfortunately, most existing works on predictive uncertainty do not return calibrated uncertainty estimates, which could be used in practice. In this work we exploit multi-grader annotation variability as a source of 'groundtruth' aleatoric uncertainty, which can be treated as a target in a supervised learning problem. We combine this groundtruth uncertainty with a Probabilistic U-Net and test on the LIDC-IDRI lung nodule CT dataset and MICCAI2012 prostate MRI dataset. We find that we are able to improve predictive uncertainty estimates. We also find that we can improve sample accuracy and sample diversity.
The predictive uncertainty can be decomposed into two parts. By the law of total variance, we can write predictive variances as a sum of these two independent components: where we have used the notation @math and @math for the expectation and variance operator. We have labeled the two right-hand terms as and uncertainty. The aleatoric term measures the average of the output variance @math , under all settings of the variables @math . If @math were a delta peak, we would expect this term not to vanish and thus is it associated with aleatoric (data) uncertainty @cite_4 . The epistemic term measures fluctuations in the mean prediction. These fluctuations exist because of uncertainty in the approximate posterior @math . If @math were a delta peak, then this term would vanish to zero, and thus we associate it with epistemic (model) uncertainty @cite_4 @cite_17 .
@cite_4 @cite_17
2600383743 2950517871 2898622970 2907176385
There are two major types of uncertainty one can model. Aleatoric uncertainty captures noise inherent in the observations. On the other hand, epistemic uncertainty accounts for uncertainty in the model - uncertainty which can be explained away given enough data. Traditionally it has been difficult to model epistemic uncertainty in computer vision, but with new Bayesian deep learning tools this is now possible. We study the benefits of modeling epistemic vs. aleatoric uncertainty in Bayesian deep learning models for vision tasks. For this we present a Bayesian deep learning framework combining input-dependent aleatoric uncertainty together with epistemic uncertainty. We study models under the framework with per-pixel semantic segmentation and depth regression tasks. Further, our explicit uncertainty formulation leads to new loss functions for these tasks, which can be interpreted as learned attenuation. This makes the loss more robust to noisy data, also giving new state-of-the-art results on segmentation and depth regression benchmarks. There are two major types of uncertainty one can model. Aleatoric uncertainty captures noise inherent in the observations. On the other hand, epistemic uncertainty accounts for uncertainty in the model -- uncertainty which can be explained away given enough data. Traditionally it has been difficult to model epistemic uncertainty in computer vision, but with new Bayesian deep learning tools this is now possible. We study the benefits of modeling epistemic vs. aleatoric uncertainty in Bayesian deep learning models for vision tasks. For this we present a Bayesian deep learning framework combining input-dependent aleatoric uncertainty together with epistemic uncertainty. We study models under the framework with per-pixel semantic segmentation and depth regression tasks. Further, our explicit uncertainty formulation leads to new loss functions for these tasks, which can be interpreted as learned attenuation. This makes the loss more robust to noisy data, also giving new state-of-the-art results on segmentation and depth regression benchmarks. We provide frequentist estimates of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty for deep neural networks. To estimate aleatoric uncertainty we propose simultaneous quantile regression, a loss function to learn all the conditional quantiles of a given target variable. These quantiles lead to well-calibrated prediction intervals. To estimate epistemic uncertainty we propose training certificates, a collection of diverse non-trivial functions that map all training samples to zero. These certificates map out-of-distribution examples to non-zero values, signaling high epistemic uncertainty. We compare our proposals to prior art in various experiments. As deep neural networks (DNNs) are applied to increasingly challenging problems, they will need to be able to represent their own uncertainty. Modeling uncertainty is one of the key features of Bayesian methods. Using Bernoulli dropout with sampling at prediction time has recently been proposed as an efficient and well performing variational inference method for DNNs. However, sampling from other multiplicative noise based variational distributions has not been investigated in depth. We evaluated Bayesian DNNs trained with Bernoulli or Gaussian multiplicative masking of either the units (dropout) or the weights (dropconnect). We tested the calibration of the probabilistic predictions of Bayesian convolutional neural networks (CNNs) on MNIST and CIFAR-10. Sampling at prediction time increased the calibration of the DNNs' probabalistic predictions. Sampling weights, whether Gaussian or Bernoulli, led to more robust representation of uncertainty compared to sampling of units. However, using either Gaussian or Bernoulli dropout led to increased test set classification accuracy. Based on these findings we used both Bernoulli dropout and Gaussian dropconnect concurrently, which we show approximates the use of a spike-and-slab variational distribution without increasing the number of learned parameters. We found that spike-and-slab sampling had higher test set performance than Gaussian dropconnect and more robustly represented its uncertainty compared to Bernoulli dropout.