Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Thomas Augustin

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

7 papers
1 author row

Possible papers

7

TMLR Journal 2026 Journal Article

Self-Supervised Laplace Approximation for Bayesian Uncertainty Quantification

  • Julian Rodemann
  • Alexander Marquard
  • Thomas Augustin
  • Michele Caprio

Approximate Bayesian inference typically revolves around computing the posterior parameter distribution. In practice, however, the main object of interest is often a model’s predictions rather than its parameters. In this work, we propose to bypass the parameter posterior and focus directly on approximating the posterior predictive distribution. We achieve this by drawing inspiration from self-training within self-supervised and semi-supervised learning. Essentially, we quantify a Bayesian model's predictive uncertainty by refitting on self-predicted data. The idea is strikingly simple: If a model assigns high likelihood to self-predicted data, these predictions are of low uncertainty, and vice versa. This yields a deterministic, sampling-free approximation of the posterior predictive. The modular structure of our Self-Supervised Laplace Approximation (SSLA) further allows us to plug in different prior specifications, enabling classical Bayesian sensitivity (w.r.t. prior choice) analysis. In order to bypass expensive refitting, we further introduce an approximate version of SSLA, called ASSLA. We study (A)SSLA both theoretically and empirically in regression models ranging from Bayesian linear models to Bayesian neural networks. Across a wide array of regression tasks with simulated and real-world datasets, our methods outperform classical Laplace approximations in predictive calibration while remaining computationally efficient.

NeurIPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper

Statistical Multicriteria Benchmarking via the GSD-Front

  • Christoph Jansen
  • Georg Schollmeyer
  • Julian Rodemann
  • Hannah Blocher
  • Thomas Augustin

Given the vast number of classifiers that have been (and continue to be) proposed, reliable methods for comparing them are becoming increasingly important. The desire for reliability is broken down into three main aspects: (1) Comparisons should allow for different quality metrics simultaneously. (2) Comparisons should take into account the statistical uncertainty induced by the choice of benchmark suite. (3) The robustness of the comparisons under small deviations in the underlying assumptions should be verifiable. To address (1), we propose to compare classifiers using a generalized stochastic dominance ordering (GSD) and present the GSD-front as an information-efficient alternative to the classical Pareto-front. For (2), we propose a consistent statistical estimator for the GSD-front and construct a statistical test for whether a (potentially new) classifier lies in the GSD-front of a set of state-of-the-art classifiers. For (3), we relax our proposed test using techniques from robust statistics and imprecise probabilities. We illustrate our concepts on the benchmark suite PMLB and on the platform OpenML.

JMLR Journal 2023 Journal Article

Statistical Comparisons of Classifiers by Generalized Stochastic Dominance

  • Christoph Jansen
  • Malte Nalenz
  • Georg Schollmeyer
  • Thomas Augustin

Although being a crucial question for the development of machine learning algorithms, there is still no consensus on how to compare classifiers over multiple data sets with respect to several criteria. Every comparison framework is confronted with (at least) three fundamental challenges: the multiplicity of quality criteria, the multiplicity of data sets and the randomness of the selection of data sets. In this paper, we add a fresh view to the vivid debate by adopting recent developments in decision theory. Based on so-called preference systems, our framework ranks classifiers by a generalized concept of stochastic dominance, which powerfully circumvents the cumbersome, and often even self-contradictory, reliance on aggregates. Moreover, we show that generalized stochastic dominance can be operationalized by solving easy-to-handle linear programs and moreover statistically tested employing an adapted two-sample observation-randomization test. This yields indeed a powerful framework for the statistical comparison of classifiers over multiple data sets with respect to multiple quality criteria simultaneously. We illustrate and investigate our framework in a simulation study and with a set of standard benchmark data sets. [abs] [ pdf ][ bib ] &copy JMLR 2023. ( edit, beta )

ISIPTA Conference 2017 Conference Paper

(Generalized) Linear Regression on Microaggregated Data – From Nuisance Parameter Optimization to Partial Identification

  • Paul Fink
  • Thomas Augustin

Protecting sensitive micro data prior to publishing or passing the data itself on is a crucial aspect: A trade-off between sufficient disclosure control and analyzability needs to be found. This paper presents a starting point to evaluate the effect of $k$-anonymity microaggregated data in (generalized) linear regression. Taking a rigorous imprecision perspective, microaggregated data are understood inducing a set $X$ of potentially true data. Based on this representation two conceptually different approaches deriving estimations from the ideal likelihood are discussed. The first one picks a single element of $X$, for instance by naively treating the microaggregated data as true ones or by introducing a maximax approach taking the elements of $X$ as nuisance parameters to be optimized. The second one seeks, in the spirit of Partial Identification, the set of all maximum likelihood estimators compatible with the elements of $X$, thus creating cautious estimators. As the simulation study corroborates, the obtained sets of estimators of the latter approach are still precise enough to be practically relevant.

ISIPTA Conference 2017 Conference Paper

Concepts for Decision Making under Severe Uncertainty with Partial Ordinal and Partial Cardinal Preferences

  • Christoph Jansen
  • Georg Schollmeyer
  • Thomas Augustin

We introduce three different approaches for decision making under uncertainty, if (I) there is only partial (both cardinal and ordinal) information on an agent’s preferences and (II) the uncertainty about the states of nature is described by a credal set. Particularly, (I) is modeled by a pair of relations, one specifying the partial rank order of the alternatives and the other modeling partial information on the strength of preference. Our first approach relies on criteria that construct complete rankings of the acts based on generalized expectation intervals. Subsequently, we introduce different concepts of global admissibility that construct partial orders by comparing all acts simultaneously. Finally, we define criteria induced by suitable binary relations on the set of acts and, therefore, can be understood as concepts of local admissibility. Whenever suitable, we provide linear programming based algorithms for checking optimality/admissibility of acts.

ISIPTA Conference 2017 Conference Paper

Kurt Weichselberger’s Contribution to Imprecise Probabilities

  • Thomas Augustin
  • Rudolf Seising

Kurt Weichselberger, one of the influential senior members of the imprecise probability community, passed away on February 7, 2016. Almost throughout his entire academic life the major focus of his research interest has been on the foundations of probability and statistics. The present article is a first attempt to trace back chronologically the development of Weichselberger’s work on interval probability and his symmetric theory of logical probability based on it. We also try to work out the intellectual background of his different projects together with some close links between them.

ISIPTA Conference 2017 Conference Paper

Towards a Cautious Modelling of Missing Data in Small Area Estimation

  • Julia Plass
  • Aziz Omar
  • Thomas Augustin

In official statistics, the problem of sampling error is rushed to extremes when not only results on sub-population level are required, which is the focus of Small Area Estimation (SAE), but also missing data arise. When the nonresponse is wrongly assumed to occur at random, the situation becomes even more dramatic, since this potentially leads to a substantial bias. Even though there are some treatments jointly considering both problems, they are all reliant upon the guarantee of strong assumptions on the missingness. For that reason, we aim at developing cautious versions of well known estimators from SAE by exploiting the results from a recently suggested likelihood approach, capable of including tenable partial knowledge about the nonresponse behaviour in an adequate way. We generalize the synthetic estimator and propose a cautious version of the so-called LGREG-synthetic estimator in the context of design-based estimators. Then, we elaborate why the approach above does not directly extend to model-based estimators and proceed with some first studies investigating different missingness scenarios. All results are illustrated through the German General Social Survey 2014, also including area-specific auxiliary information from the German Federal Statistical Office’s data report.

v2026.09.13