Stephan Rabanser

Olive Franzese, Adam Dziedzic, Christopher A. Choquette-Choo et al. · deepmind

Collaborative machine learning (ML) is widely used to enable institutions to learn better models from distributed data. While collaborative approaches to learning intuitively protect user data, they remain vulnerable to either the server, the clients, or both, deviating from the protocol. Indeed, because the protocol is asymmetric, a malicious server can abuse its power to reconstruct client data points. Conversely, malicious clients can corrupt learning with malicious updates. Thus, both clients and servers require a guarantee when the other cannot be trusted to fully cooperate. In this work, we propose a peer-to-peer (P2P) learning scheme that is secure against malicious servers and robust to malicious clients. Our core contribution is a generic framework that transforms any (compatible) algorithm for robust aggregation of model updates to the setting where servers and clients can act maliciously. Finally, we demonstrate the computational efficiency of our approach even with 1-million parameter models trained by 100s of peers on standard datasets.

Stephan Rabanser, Anvith Thudi, Kimia Hamidieh et al. · utoronto

Selective Prediction is the task of rejecting inputs a model would predict incorrectly on. This involves a trade-off between input space coverage (how many data points are accepted) and model utility (how good is the performance on accepted data points). Current methods for selective prediction typically impose constraints on either the model architecture or the optimization objective; this inhibits their usage in practice and introduces unknown interactions with pre-existing loss functions. In contrast to prior work, we show that state-of-the-art selective prediction performance can be attained solely from studying the (discretized) training dynamics of a model. We propose a general framework that, given a test input, monitors metrics capturing the instability of predictions from intermediate models (i.e., checkpoints) obtained during training w.r.t. the final model's prediction. In particular, we reject data points exhibiting too much disagreement with the final prediction at late stages in training. The proposed rejection mechanism is domain-agnostic (i.e., it works for both discrete and real-valued prediction) and can be flexibly combined with existing selective prediction approaches as it does not require any train-time modifications. Our experimental evaluation on image classification, regression, and time series problems shows that our method beats past state-of-the-art accuracy/utility trade-offs on typical selective prediction benchmarks.

Adam Dziedzic, Stephan Rabanser, Mohammad Yaghini et al. · utoronto

The lack of well-calibrated confidence estimates makes neural networks inadequate in safety-critical domains such as autonomous driving or healthcare. In these settings, having the ability to abstain from making a prediction on out-of-distribution (OOD) data can be as important as correctly classifying in-distribution data. We introduce $p$-DkNN, a novel inference procedure that takes a trained deep neural network and analyzes the similarity structures of its intermediate hidden representations to compute $p$-values associated with the end-to-end model prediction. The intuition is that statistical tests performed on latent representations can serve not only as a classifier, but also offer a statistically well-founded estimation of uncertainty. $p$-DkNN is scalable and leverages the composition of representations learned by hidden layers, which makes deep representation learning successful. Our theoretical analysis builds on Neyman-Pearson classification and connects it to recent advances in selective classification (reject option). We demonstrate advantageous trade-offs between abstaining from predicting on OOD inputs and maintaining high accuracy on in-distribution inputs. We find that $p$-DkNN forces adaptive attackers crafting adversarial examples, a form of worst-case OOD inputs, to introduce semantically meaningful changes to the inputs.

Stephan Rabanser, Tim Januschowski, Kashif Rasul et al.

We introduce a novel, practically relevant variation of the anomaly detection problem in multi-variate time series: intrinsic anomaly detection. It appears in diverse practical scenarios ranging from DevOps to IoT, where we want to recognize failures of a system that operates under the influence of a surrounding environment. Intrinsic anomalies are changes in the functional dependency structure between time series that represent an environment and time series that represent the internal state of a system that is placed in said environment. We formalize this problem, provide under-studied public and new purpose-built data sets for it, and present methods that handle intrinsic anomaly detection. These address the short-coming of existing anomaly detection methods that cannot differentiate between expected changes in the system's state and unexpected ones, i.e., changes in the system that deviate from the environment's influence. Our most promising approach is fully unsupervised and combines adversarial learning and time series representation learning, thereby addressing problems such as label sparsity and subjectivity, while allowing to navigate and improve notoriously problematic anomaly detection data sets.

Stephan Rabanser, Sayash Kapoor, Peter Kirgis et al.

AI agents are increasingly deployed to execute important tasks. While rising accuracy scores on standard benchmarks suggest rapid progress, many agents still continue to fail in practice. This discrepancy highlights a fundamental limitation of current evaluations: compressing agent behavior into a single success metric obscures critical operational flaws. Notably, it ignores whether agents behave consistently across runs, withstand perturbations, fail predictably, or have bounded error severity. Grounded in safety-critical engineering, we provide a holistic performance profile by proposing twelve concrete metrics that decompose agent reliability along four key dimensions: consistency, robustness, predictability, and safety. Evaluating 14 agentic models across two complementary benchmarks, we find that recent capability gains have only yielded small improvements in reliability. By exposing these persistent limitations, our metrics complement traditional evaluations while offering tools for reasoning about how agents perform, degrade, and fail.

Sayash Kapoor, Peter Kirgis, Andrew Schwartz et al.

Benchmark-based evaluation remains important for tracking frontier AI progress. But it can both overstate and understate deployed capability because it privileges tasks that can be precisely specified, automatically graded, easy to optimize for, and run with low budgets and short time horizons. We advocate for a complementary class of evaluations, which we term open-world evaluations: long-horizon, messy, real-world tasks assessed through small-sample qualitative analysis rather than benchmark-scale automation. In this paper we survey recent open-world evaluations, identify their strengths and limitations, and introduce CRUX (Collaborative Research for Updating AI eXpectations), a project for conducting such evaluations regularly. As a first instance, we task an AI agent with developing and publishing a simple iOS application to the Apple App Store. The agent completed the task with only a single avoidable manual intervention, suggesting that open-world evaluations can provide early warning of capabilities that may soon become widespread. We conclude with recommendations for designing and reporting open-world evals.

Peter Kirgis, Sayash Kapoor, Stephan Rabanser et al.

Agent benchmarks typically report only final outcomes: pass or fail. This threatens evaluation credibility in three ways. First, scores may be inflated or deflated by shortcuts and benchmark artifacts, misrepresenting capability. Second, benchmark performance may fail to predict real-world utility due to scaffold limitations and recurring failure modes. Finally, capability scores may conceal dangerous or catastrophic actions taken by the agent. We argue that log analysis -- the systematic tracking and analysis of the inputs, execution, and outputs of an AI agent -- is necessary to overcome these validity threats and promote credible agent evaluation. In this paper, we (1) present a taxonomy of threats to credible evaluation documented through log analysis, and (2) develop a set of guiding principles for log analysis. We illustrate these principles on tau-Bench Airline, revealing that pass^5 performance was under-elicited by nearly 50% and surfacing deployment failure modes invisible to outcome metrics. We conclude with pragmatic recommendations to increase uptake of log analysis, directed at diverse stakeholders including benchmark creators, model developers, independent evaluators, and deployers.

Stephan Rabanser, Nathalie Rauschmayr, Achin Kulshrestha et al.

Large-scale machine learning models deliver strong performance across a wide range of tasks but come with significant computational and resource constraints. To mitigate these challenges, local smaller models are often deployed alongside larger models, relying on routing and deferral mechanisms to offload complex tasks. However, existing approaches inadequately balance the capabilities of these models, often resulting in unnecessary deferrals or sub-optimal resource usage. In this work we introduce a novel loss function called Gatekeeper for calibrating smaller models in cascade setups. Our approach fine-tunes the smaller model to confidently handle tasks it can perform correctly while deferring complex tasks to the larger model. Moreover, it incorporates a mechanism for managing the trade-off between model performance and deferral accuracy, and is broadly applicable across various tasks and domains without any architectural changes. We evaluate our method on encoder-only, decoder-only, and encoder-decoder architectures. Experiments across image classification, language modeling, and vision-language tasks show that our approach substantially improves deferral performance.

Stephan Rabanser, Ali Shahin Shamsabadi, Olive Franzese et al.

Cautious predictions -- where a machine learning model abstains when uncertain -- are crucial for limiting harmful errors in safety-critical applications. In this work, we identify a novel threat: a dishonest institution can exploit these mechanisms to discriminate or unjustly deny services under the guise of uncertainty. We demonstrate the practicality of this threat by introducing an uncertainty-inducing attack called Mirage, which deliberately reduces confidence in targeted input regions, thereby covertly disadvantaging specific individuals. At the same time, Mirage maintains high predictive performance across all data points. To counter this threat, we propose Confidential Guardian, a framework that analyzes calibration metrics on a reference dataset to detect artificially suppressed confidence. Additionally, it employs zero-knowledge proofs of verified inference to ensure that reported confidence scores genuinely originate from the deployed model. This prevents the provider from fabricating arbitrary model confidence values while protecting the model's proprietary details. Our results confirm that Confidential Guardian effectively prevents the misuse of cautious predictions, providing verifiable assurances that abstention reflects genuine model uncertainty rather than malicious intent.

Stephan Rabanser, Nicolas Papernot

Selective classifiers improve model reliability by abstaining on inputs the model deems uncertain. However, few practical approaches achieve the gold-standard performance of a perfect-ordering oracle that accepts examples exactly in order of correctness. Our work formalizes this shortfall as the selective-classification gap and present the first finite-sample decomposition of this gap to five distinct sources of looseness: Bayes noise, approximation error, ranking error, statistical noise, and implementation- or shift-induced slack. Crucially, our analysis reveals that monotone post-hoc calibration -- often believed to strengthen selective classifiers -- has limited impact on closing this gap, since it rarely alters the model's underlying score ranking. Bridging the gap therefore requires scoring mechanisms that can effectively reorder predictions rather than merely rescale them. We validate our decomposition on synthetic two-moons data and on real-world vision and language benchmarks, isolating each error component through controlled experiments. Our results confirm that (i) Bayes noise and limited model capacity can account for substantial gaps, (ii) only richer, feature-aware calibrators meaningfully improve score ordering, and (iii) data shift introduces a separate slack that demands distributionally robust training. Together, our decomposition yields a quantitative error budget as well as actionable design guidelines that practitioners can use to build selective classifiers which approximate ideal oracle behavior more closely.

Stephan Rabanser

Machine learning (ML) systems are increasingly deployed in high-stakes domains where reliability is paramount. This thesis investigates how uncertainty estimation can enhance the safety and trustworthiness of ML, focusing on selective prediction -- where models abstain when confidence is low. We first show that a model's training trajectory contains rich uncertainty signals that can be exploited without altering its architecture or loss. By ensembling predictions from intermediate checkpoints, we propose a lightweight, post-hoc abstention method that works across tasks, avoids the cost of deep ensembles, and achieves state-of-the-art selective prediction performance. Crucially, this approach is fully compatible with differential privacy (DP), allowing us to study how privacy noise affects uncertainty quality. We find that while many methods degrade under DP, our trajectory-based approach remains robust, and we introduce a framework for isolating the privacy-uncertainty trade-off. Next, we then develop a finite-sample decomposition of the selective classification gap -- the deviation from the oracle accuracy-coverage curve -- identifying five interpretable error sources and clarifying which interventions can close the gap. This explains why calibration alone cannot fix ranking errors, motivating methods that improve uncertainty ordering. Finally, we show that uncertainty signals can be adversarially manipulated to hide errors or deny service while maintaining high accuracy, and we design defenses combining calibration audits with verifiable inference. Together, these contributions advance reliable ML by improving, evaluating, and safeguarding uncertainty estimation, enabling models that not only make accurate predictions -- but also know when to say "I do not know".

Angéline Pouget, Mohammad Yaghini, Stephan Rabanser et al.

Deploying machine learning models in safety-critical domains poses a key challenge: ensuring reliable model performance on downstream user data without access to ground truth labels for direct validation. We propose the suitability filter, a novel framework designed to detect performance deterioration by utilizing suitability signals -- model output features that are sensitive to covariate shifts and indicative of potential prediction errors. The suitability filter evaluates whether classifier accuracy on unlabeled user data shows significant degradation compared to the accuracy measured on the labeled test dataset. Specifically, it ensures that this degradation does not exceed a pre-specified margin, which represents the maximum acceptable drop in accuracy. To achieve reliable performance evaluation, we aggregate suitability signals for both test and user data and compare these empirical distributions using statistical hypothesis testing, thus providing insights into decision uncertainty. Our modular method adapts to various models and domains. Empirical evaluations across different classification tasks demonstrate that the suitability filter reliably detects performance deviations due to covariate shift. This enables proactive mitigation of potential failures in high-stakes applications.

Stephan Rabanser, Anvith Thudi, Abhradeep Thakurta et al.

Training reliable deep learning models which avoid making overconfident but incorrect predictions is a longstanding challenge. This challenge is further exacerbated when learning has to be differentially private: protection provided to sensitive data comes at the price of injecting additional randomness into the learning process. In this work, we conduct a thorough empirical investigation of selective classifiers -- that can abstain when they are unsure -- under a differential privacy constraint. We find that several popular selective prediction approaches are ineffective in a differentially private setting as they increase the risk of privacy leakage. At the same time, we identify that a recent approach that only uses checkpoints produced by an off-the-shelf private learning algorithm stands out as particularly suitable under DP. Further, we show that differential privacy does not just harm utility but also degrades selective classification performance. To analyze this effect across privacy levels, we propose a novel evaluation mechanism which isolate selective prediction performance across model utility levels. Our experimental results show that recovering the performance level attainable by non-private models is possible but comes at a considerable coverage cost as the privacy budget decreases.

Stephan Rabanser, Tim Januschowski, Valentin Flunkert et al.

Time series modeling techniques based on deep learning have seen many advancements in recent years, especially in data-abundant settings and with the central aim of learning global models that can extract patterns across multiple time series. While the crucial importance of appropriate data pre-processing and scaling has often been noted in prior work, most studies focus on improving model architectures. In this paper we empirically investigate the effect of data input and output transformations on the predictive performance of several neural forecasting architectures. In particular, we investigate the effectiveness of several forms of data binning, i.e. converting real-valued time series into categorical ones, when combined with feed-forward, recurrent neural networks, and convolution-based sequence models. In many non-forecasting applications where these models have been very successful, the model inputs and outputs are categorical (e.g. words from a fixed vocabulary in natural language processing applications or quantized pixel color intensities in computer vision). For forecasting applications, where the time series are typically real-valued, various ad-hoc data transformations have been proposed, but have not been systematically compared. To remedy this, we evaluate the forecasting accuracy of instances of the aforementioned model classes when combined with different types of data scaling and binning. We find that binning almost always improves performance (compared to using normalized real-valued inputs), but that the particular type of binning chosen is of lesser importance.

Stephan Rabanser, Stephan Günnemann, Zachary C. Lipton

We might hope that when faced with unexpected inputs, well-designed software systems would fire off warnings. Machine learning (ML) systems, however, which depend strongly on properties of their inputs (e.g. the i.i.d. assumption), tend to fail silently. This paper explores the problem of building ML systems that fail loudly, investigating methods for detecting dataset shift, identifying exemplars that most typify the shift, and quantifying shift malignancy. We focus on several datasets and various perturbations to both covariates and label distributions with varying magnitudes and fractions of data affected. Interestingly, we show that across the dataset shifts that we explore, a two-sample-testing-based approach, using pre-trained classifiers for dimensionality reduction, performs best. Moreover, we demonstrate that domain-discriminating approaches tend to be helpful for characterizing shifts qualitatively and determining if they are harmful.

Stephan Rabanser, Oleksandr Shchur, Stephan Günnemann

Tensors are multidimensional arrays of numerical values and therefore generalize matrices to multiple dimensions. While tensors first emerged in the psychometrics community in the $20^{\text{th}}$ century, they have since then spread to numerous other disciplines, including machine learning. Tensors and their decompositions are especially beneficial in unsupervised learning settings, but are gaining popularity in other sub-disciplines like temporal and multi-relational data analysis, too. The scope of this paper is to give a broad overview of tensors, their decompositions, and how they are used in machine learning. As part of this, we are going to introduce basic tensor concepts, discuss why tensors can be considered more rigid than matrices with respect to the uniqueness of their decomposition, explain the most important factorization algorithms and their properties, provide concrete examples of tensor decomposition applications in machine learning, conduct a case study on tensor-based estimation of mixture models, talk about the current state of research, and provide references to available software libraries.