Ann M. Moormann

Paul N. Patrone, Raquel A. Binder, Catherine S. Forconi et al.

Diagnostic testing provides a unique setting for studying and developing tools in classification theory. In such contexts, the concept of prevalence, i.e. the number of individuals with a given condition, is fundamental, both as an inherent quantity of interest and as a parameter that controls classification accuracy. This manuscript is the first in a two-part series that studies deeper connections between classification theory and prevalence, showing how the latter establishes a more complete theory of uncertainty quantification (UQ) for certain types of machine learning (ML). We motivate this analysis via a lemma demonstrating that general classifiers minimizing a prevalence-weighted error contain the same probabilistic information as Bayes-optimal classifiers, which depend on conditional probability densities. This leads us to study relative probability level-sets $B^\star (q)$, which are reinterpreted as both classification boundaries and useful tools for quantifying uncertainty in class labels. To realize this in practice, we also propose a numerical, homotopy algorithm that estimates the $B^\star (q)$ by minimizing a prevalence-weighted empirical error. The successes and shortcomings of this method motivate us to revisit properties of the level sets, and we deduce the corresponding classifiers obey a useful monotonicity property that stabilizes the numerics and points to important extensions to UQ of ML. Throughout, we validate our methods in the context of synthetic data and a research-use-only SARS-CoV-2 enzyme-linked immunosorbent (ELISA) assay.

Paul N. Patrone, Raquel A. Binder, Catherine S. Forconi et al.

This is the second manuscript in a two-part series that uses diagnostic testing to understand the connection between prevalence (i.e. number of elements in a class), uncertainty quantification (UQ), and classification theory. Part I considered the context of supervised machine learning (ML) and established a duality between prevalence and the concept of relative conditional probability. The key idea of that analysis was to train a family of discriminative classifiers by minimizing a sum of prevalence-weighted empirical risk functions. The resulting outputs can be interpreted as relative probability level-sets, which thereby yield uncertainty estimates in the class labels. This procedure also demonstrated that certain discriminative and generative ML models are equivalent. Part II considers the extent to which these results can be extended to tasks in unsupervised learning through recourse to ideas in linear algebra. We first observe that the distribution of an impure population, for which the class of a corresponding sample is unknown, can be parameterized in terms of a prevalence. This motivates us to introduce the concept of linearly independent populations, which have different but unknown prevalence values. Using this, we identify an isomorphism between classifiers defined in terms of impure and pure populations. In certain cases, this also leads to a nonlinear system of equations whose solution yields the prevalence values of the linearly independent populations, fully realizing unsupervised learning as a generalization of supervised learning. We illustrate our methods in the context of synthetic data and a research-use-only SARS-CoV-2 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).