Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Group conditional validity via multi-group learning

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 2303.03995 v2 pith:WDLU7ZJ3 submitted 2023-03-07 cs.LG math.STstat.TH

Group conditional validity via multi-group learning

classification cs.LG math.STstat.TH
keywords guaranteeslearningmulti-groupgroupproblemstructurevalidityalgorithm
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

We consider the problem of distribution-free conformal prediction and the criterion of group conditional validity. This criterion is motivated by many practical scenarios including hidden stratification and group fairness. Existing methods achieve such guarantees under either restrictive grouping structure or distributional assumptions, or they are overly-conservative under heteroskedastic noise. We propose a simple reduction to the problem of achieving validity guarantees for individual populations by leveraging algorithms for a problem called multi-group learning. This allows us to port theoretical guarantees from multi-group learning to obtain obtain sample complexity guarantees for conformal prediction. We also provide a new algorithm for multi-group learning for groups with hierarchical structure. Using this algorithm in our reduction leads to improved sample complexity guarantees with a simpler predictor structure.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Socio-Conformal Calibration in Complex Survey Data: Marginal Validity Is Not Enough for Subgroup Reliability

    stat.ME 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Standard conformal prediction gives nominal overall coverage on Pew survey data but leaves ~13-point weighted gaps across race-education subgroups, and group-specific Mondrian calibration does not reliably close them.