Illegal logging poses a significant threat to global biodiversity, climate stability, and depresses international prices for legal wood harvesting and responsible forest products trade, affecting livelihoods and communities across the globe. Stable isotope ratio analysis (SIRA) is rapidly becoming an important tool for determining the harvest location of traded, organic, products. The spatial pattern in stable isotope ratio values depends on factors such as atmospheric and environmental conditions and can thus be used for geographic origin identification. We present here the results of a deployed machine learning pipeline where we leverage both isotope values and atmospheric variables to determine timber harvest location. Additionally, the pipeline incorporates uncertainty estimation to facilitate the interpretation of harvest location determination for analysts. We present our experiments on a collection of oak (Quercus spp.) tree samples from its global range. Our pipeline outperforms comparable state-of-the-art models determining geographic harvest origin of commercially traded wood products, and has been used by European enforcement agencies to identify harvest location misrepresentation. We also identify opportunities for further advancement of our framework and how it can be generalized to help identify the origin of falsely labeled organic products throughout the supply chain.

Automatic cell-type annotation methods assign cell-type labels to new, unlabeled datasets by leveraging relationships from a reference RNA-seq atlas. However, new datasets may include labels absent from the reference dataset or exhibit feature distributions that diverge from it. These scenarios can significantly affect the reliability of cell type predictions, a factor often overlooked in current automatic annotation methods. The field of out-of-distribution detection (OOD), primarily focused on computer vision, addresses the identification of instances that differ from the training distribution. Therefore, the implementation of OOD methods in the context of novel cell type annotation and data shift detection for single-cell transcriptomics may enhance annotation accuracy and trustworthiness. We evaluate six OOD detection methods: LogitNorm, MC dropout, Deep Ensembles, Energy-based OOD, Deep NN, and Posterior networks, for their annotation and OOD detection performance in both synthetical and real-life application settings. We show that OOD detection methods can accurately identify novel cell types and demonstrate potential to detect significant data shifts in non-integrated datasets. Moreover, we find that integration of the OOD datasets does not interfere with OOD detection of novel cell types.

Abstract The accurate representation of epistemic uncertainty is a challenging yet essential task in machine learning. A widely used representation corresponds to convex sets of probabilistic predictors, also known as credal sets. One popular way of constructing these credal sets is via ensembling or specialized supervised learning methods, where the epistemic uncertainty can be quantified through measures such as the set size or the disagreement among members. In principle, these sets should contain the true data-generating distribution. As a necessary condition for this validity, we adopt the strongest notion of calibration as a proxy. Concretely, we propose a novel statistical test to determine whether there is a convex combination of the set’s predictions that is calibrated in distribution. In contrast to previous methods, our framework allows the convex combination to be instance-dependent, recognizing that different ensemble members may be better calibrated in different regions of the input space. Moreover, we learn this combination via proper scoring rules, which inherently optimize for calibration. Building on differentiable, kernel-based estimators of calibration errors, we introduce a nonparametric testing procedure and demonstrate the benefits of capturing instance-level variability on synthetic and real-world experiments.

MOTIVATION: Automatic cell type annotation methods assign cell type labels to new datasets by extracting relationships from a reference RNA-seq dataset. However, due to the limited resolution of gene expression features, there is always uncertainty present in the label assignment. To enhance the reliability and robustness of annotation, most machine learning methods address this uncertainty by providing a full reject option, i.e. when the predicted confidence score of a cell type label falls below a user-defined threshold, no label is assigned and no prediction is made. As a better alternative, some methods deploy hierarchical models and consider a so-called partial rejection by returning internal nodes of the hierarchy as label assignment. However, because a detailed experimental analysis of various rejection approaches is missing in the literature, there is currently no consensus on best practices. RESULTS: We evaluate three annotation approaches (i) full rejection, (ii) partial rejection, and (iii) no rejection for both flat and hierarchical probabilistic classifiers. Our findings indicate that hierarchical classifiers are superior when rejection is applied, with partial rejection being the preferred rejection approach, as it preserves a significant amount of label information. For optimal rejection implementation, the rejection threshold should be determined through careful examination of a method's rejection behavior. Without rejection, flat and hierarchical annotation perform equally well, as long as the cell type hierarchy accurately captures transcriptomic relationships. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Code is freely available at https://github.com/Latheuni/Hierarchical_reject and https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10697468.

Multi-class classification methods that produce sets of probabilistic classifiers, such as ensemble learning methods, are able to model aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty. Aleatoric uncertainty is then typically quantified via the Bayes error, and epistemic uncertainty via the size of the set. In this paper, we extend the notion of calibration, which is commonly used to evaluate the validity of the aleatoric uncertainty representation of a single probabilistic classifier, to assess the validity of an epistemic uncertainty representation obtained by sets of probabilistic classifiers. Broadly speaking, we call a set of probabilistic classifiers calibrated if one can find a calibrated convex combination of these classifiers. To evaluate this notion of calibration, we propose a novel nonparametric calibration test that generalizes an existing test for single probabilistic classifiers to the case of sets of probabilistic classifiers. Making use of this test, we empirically show that ensembles of deep neural networks are often not well calibrated.

Set-valued prediction is a well-known concept in multi-class classification. When a classifier is uncertain about the class label for a test instance, it can predict a set of classes instead of a single class. In this paper, we focus on hierarchical multi-class classification problems, where valid sets (typically) correspond to internal nodes of the hierarchy. We argue that this is a very strong restriction, and we propose a relaxation by introducing the notion of representation complexity for a predicted set. In combination with probabilistic classifiers, this leads to a challenging inference problem for which specific combinatorial optimization algorithms are needed. We propose three methods and evaluate them on benchmark datasets: a naïve approach that is based on matrix-vector multiplication, a reformulation as a knapsack problem with conflict graph, and a recursive tree search method. Experimental results demonstrate that the last method is computationally more efficient than the other two approaches, due to a hierarchical factorization of the conditional class distribution.