The performance of a method is generally measured by an assessment of the errors between the method's results and a set of reference data. The prediction uncertainty is a measure of the confidence that can be attached to a method's prediction. Its estimation is based on the random part of the errors not explained by reference data uncertainty, which implies an evaluation of the systematic component(s) of the errors. As the predictions of most density functional approximations (DFA) present systematic errors, the standard performance statistics, such as the mean of the absolute errors (MAE or MUE), cannot be directly used to infer prediction uncertainty. We investigate here an a posteriori calibration method to estimate the prediction uncertainty of DFAs for properties of solids. A linear model is shown to be adequate to address the systematic trend in the errors. The applicability of this approach to modest-size reference sets (28 systems) is evaluated for the prediction of band gaps, bulk moduli, and lattice constants with a wide panel of DFAs.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jp509980w | DOI Listing |
J Exp Psychol Gen
January 2025
Olin Business School, Washington University in St. Louis.
How do people predict the outcome of an event from a set of possible outcomes? One might expect people to predict whichever outcome they believe to be most likely to arise. However, we document a robust disconnect between what people predict and what they believe to be most likely. This disconnect arises because people consider not only relative likelihood but also absolute likelihood when predicting.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCurr Res Toxicol
December 2024
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Division of Translational Toxicology, National Toxicology Program Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods, P.O. Box 12233, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.
Mechanistically based non-animal methods for assessing skin sensitization hazard have been developed, but are not considered sufficient, individually, to conclusively define the skin sensitization potential or potency of a chemical. This resulted in the development of defined approaches (DAs), as documented in OECD TG 497, for combining information sources in a prescriptive manner to provide a determination of risk or potency. However, there are currently no DAs within OECD TG 497 that can derive a point of departure (POD) for risk assessment.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Cogn
January 2025
Department of Psychology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, DE.
Visual working memory and verbal storage are often investigated independently of one another. However, a growing body of evidence suggests that naming visual stimuli can provide an advantage in performance during visual working memory tasks. On the other hand, there is also evidence that labeling could lead to biases in recall.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Cogn
January 2025
Institute for Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Universitätsstraße 1, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany.
The question we addressed in the current study is whether the mere prospect of monetary reward gain affects subjective time perception. To test this question, we collected trial-based confidence reports in a task where participants made categorical decisions about probe durations relative to the reference duration. When there was a potential to gain a monetary reward, the duration was perceived to be longer than in the neutral condition.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnsuring trustworthiness is fundamental to the development of artificial intelligence (AI) that is considered societally responsible, particularly in cancer diagnostics, where a misdiagnosis can have dire consequences. Current digital pathology AI models lack systematic solutions to address trustworthiness concerns arising from model limitations and data discrepancies between model deployment and development environments. To address this issue, we developed TRUECAM, a framework designed to ensure both data and model trustworthiness in non-small cell lung cancer subtyping with whole-slide images.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!