ArticleScientific reports2026
Design, framework and benchmark of safety monitors for black-box classifiers.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The last decade has seen a surging opportunity for developing autonomous systems (e.g., fully autonomous driving, computer-guided robotic surgery, mobile robots for inspections and surveillance, and manufacturing robots) to relieve the human workforce from time-consuming, laborious, and often hazardous tasks. These cutting-edge innovations require trustworthy and autonomous classification processes to provide their intended functionality without harming the health of people, infrastructures, and the environment, or causing financial losses. Unfortunately, even human experts cannot always act as trustworthy classifiers, let alone computer-guided decision-makers based on machine learning (ML). We advocate that striving for correct software will just lead to a dead end: instead, we should focus on minimizing wrong outputs—misclassifications in case of classifiers—suspecting prediction errors and handling them via tailored software architectures. To such extent, this paper proposes a software architecture that allows for monitoring a black-box software component, triggering a rejection of its output whenever specific uncertainty conditions are detected trough an ensemble of uncertainty measures that are continuously computed. Such Safety wraPper thROugh ensembles of UncertainTy measures (SPROUT) is designed to adapt to any classification task, either binary or multiclass, processing tabular or image data. Experimental results using a wide range of datasets, classifiers, and parameter setups show how our approach can consistently reject a significant portion of misclassifications, even suspecting all incorrect predictions in specific cases. To maximize usage and ease of use, SPROUT is available as an open-source library with pre-trained models and files for effortless case study execution.
Indexed as
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.