Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2609.09257

Accountable and uncertainty-aware evaluation of sensor-based AI under distribution shift: devices, subjects, and nearly three years underground

Benny Platte·Rico Thomanek·Christian Roschke·Marc Ritter
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Sensor-based AI systems are rarely operated under the conditions under which they were trained: devices, personnel and recording epochs change, and each change degrades performance in ways a random train-test split cannot reveal. We propose a staged, accountable evaluation protocol that treats the evaluation of a deployed model as a measurement with declared reference levels and a quantified uncertainty. Four cumulative generalisation stages hold out devices, subjects and time. Each stage is judged on quantiles of repeated trainings against chance references with the correct class count, an out-of-present-scope rate exposes silent misdirection towards classes that are no longer present in deployment relative to training, and an explicit decision rule ties roll-out decisions not to means but to 5% quantiles. We demonstrate the protocol on infrastructure-free geomagnetic localisation with smartphone-based recurrent classifiers in two real underground mines, including a replication of the scheme's training stages at the second site. Unchanged models are re-evaluated on data recorded 34 months after the training campaign, on a device generation unknown at training time and with a held-out surveyor. The 5% quantile of their present-conditioned precision there is 0.39 over 299 repeated trainings, 16.5 times the chance level; across the composition of the 42 reachable location classes the figure varies by +/-0.08, several times the spread between repeated runs. Repeated trainings of a single configuration show why means mislead: a bimodal configuration passes a mean-based test decisively while its 5% quantile lies more than an order of magnitude below chance.

Explore related subjects

cs.LGstat.MEstat.ML

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Benny Platte, Rico Thomanek, Christian Roschke, Marc Ritter. 2026-09-08. Accountable and uncertainty-aware evaluation of sensor-based AI under distribution shift: devices, subjects, and nearly three years underground. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.09257

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

cs.LG subjectstat.ME subjectstat.ML subject

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Label Propagation for Physics-Informed Neural Networks and Physics-Informed Gaussian Processes

We present a series of empirical results of the application of semi-supervised label propagation techniques in training physics-informed machine learning methods. This includes self-training of physics-informed neural networks and physics-informed Gaussian processes in isolation, and the integration of the two via co-training, therefore establishing a hybrid between these two main classes of physics-informed machine learning. We demonstrate via extensive numerical experiments how these methods can ameliorate the issue of propagating information from boundaries into the physical domain, including information from initial conditions in the case of solving stiff time-dependent partial differential equations, which is known to be a common failure mode of physics-informed machine learning.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Multi-Armed Bernoulli Bandits via Minimax Single-Arm Stopping

We develop an index policy for finite-horizon Bernoulli multi-armed bandits from minimax solutions to single-arm bandit (SAB) problems. Each SAB problem involves choosing between an unknown Bernoulli arm and a known reward. We show that minimizing worst-case regret of SAB problems over all non-anticipative policies admits an exact semi-infinite linear programming formulation. The resulting stopping policies offer a natural way to compare arms: the higher the known reward against which a policy continues sampling, the more promising the unknown arm. We turn this intuition into indices based on cumulative continuation probabilities, with a monotone adjustment and a reward-shortfall cap. By relating index errors to the regret of single-arm stopping policies, we establish a distribution-free regret bound of $4.45\sqrt{KT}+10.75K$ for $K$ arms and horizon $T$. This bound matches the minimax-optimal regret order established in the literature. The guarantee extends to rewards supported on $[0,1]$ through Bernoulli randomization. We also provide a finite-grid implementation with quantified approximation loss. In numerical experiments, the SAB-based index policy achieves lower worst-case regret than every tested benchmark policy across all evaluated numbers of arms and horizons, while closely matching the grid-based MAB minimax policy in the two-arm setting.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Autonomous Model Lifecycle Management for Digital Twin-Based Manufacturing Control

Manufacturing AI systems must autonomously adapt to continuous distributional shift from raw-material variability, ambient changes, and equipment aging, under strict safeguard and operator-trust requirements where model failures risk physical damage. This paper presents a closed-loop Cyber-Physical System (CPS) for autonomous model lifecycle management in automotive manufacturing, deployed since 2023. The system manages product-specialized model pairs: a sequence-to-sequence physics model (LPP) serving as a digital twin, and a deep Reinforcement Learning (RL) control policy (LCP) trained against it. Per retraining cycle, multiple model variants spanning architecture families and RL algorithms compete; only the best-scoring candidate advances. A Conductor orchestrator autonomously manages plant-wide model inventories with dependency-aware retraining and Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) fallback. Reflecting the principle of Human-Centric Intelligence, the LCP composite score embeds an operator-trust gate penalizing policies deviating from established practice; without it, 23% of policies are rejected by operators despite passing accuracy thresholds. Across multiple facilities, LCP-controlled processes achieve process stability improvements of 28-45% over uncontrolled baselines with zero safety incidents.

cs.LG↗