Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Hierarchical Selective Classification

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2405.11533 v2 pith:BAKPWKLX submitted 2024-05-19 cs.LG cs.CV

classification cs.LGcs.CV
keywords hierarchicalselectiveclassificationuncertaintyaccuracyalgorithmalgorithmsapproach
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Deploying deep neural networks for risk-sensitive tasks necessitates an uncertainty estimation mechanism. This paper introduces hierarchical selective classification, extending selective classification to a hierarchical setting. Our approach leverages the inherent structure of class relationships, enabling models to reduce the specificity of their predictions when faced with uncertainty. In this paper, we first formalize hierarchical risk and coverage, and introduce hierarchical risk-coverage curves. Next, we develop algorithms for hierarchical selective classification (which we refer to as "inference rules"), and propose an efficient algorithm that guarantees a target accuracy constraint with high probability. Lastly, we conduct extensive empirical studies on over a thousand ImageNet classifiers, revealing that training regimes such as CLIP, pretraining on ImageNet21k and knowledge distillation boost hierarchical selective performance.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. When Should LLMs Be Less Specific? Selective Abstraction for Reliable Long-Form Text Generation

    cs.AI 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Atom-wise selective abstraction—replacing low-confidence factual claims with higher-confidence, less specific versions—improves the risk-coverage trade-off in long-form generation by up to 27.73% AURC over claim removal.

Pith tools