ArticleIEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems2023
Calibration and Uncertainty in Neural Time-to-Event Modeling.
Article in IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Concordance-based Predictive Uncertainty (CPU)-Index: Proof-of-concept with application towards improved specificity of lung cancers on low dose screening CT.Artificial intelligence in medicine · 2025Article
- Weakly unsupervised conditional generative adversarial network for image-based prognostic prediction for COVID-19 patients based on chest CT.Medical image analysis · 2021Article
- Enabling Counterfactual Survival Analysis with Balanced Representations.ACM CHIL 2021 : proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Health, Inference, and Learning : April 8-9, 2021, Virtual Event. ACM Conference on Health, Inference, and Learning (2021 : Online) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Models for predicting the time of a future event are crucial for risk assessment, across a diverse range of applications. Existing time-to-event (survival) models have focused primarily on preserving pairwise ordering of estimated event times (i.e., relative risk). We propose neural time-to-event models that account for calibration and uncertainty while predicting accurate absolute event times. Specifically, an adversarial nonparametric model is introduced for estimating matched time-to-event distributions for probabilistically concentrated and accurate predictions. We also consider replacing the discriminator of the adversarial nonparametric model with a survival-function matching estimator that accounts for model calibration. The proposed estimator can be used as a means of estimating and comparing conditional survival distributions while accounting for the predictive uncertainty of probabilistic models. Extensive experiments show that the distribution matching methods outperform existing approaches in terms of both calibration and concentration of time-to-event distributions.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.