
























Abstract:Conformal triage converts predictive scores into deployment actions that either release a case, flag it for urgent attention, or defer it to human review. Under prevalence shift, however, the usual summaries of marginal coverage and human-review rate can miss the safety-critical question of whether patients who truly experience the target event are released without review. To address this gap, we introduce a leakage-aware deployment audit for release-side conformal triage. It first assigns target subjects to three non-overlapping roles: prevalence correction, conformal calibration, and held-out release-safety evaluation. This separation then lets the audit evaluate release directly: how many event-positive patients are cleared without review, whether the pilot has enough event labels for calibration, and how the safety-review trade-off shifts. Applying this audit to a retrospective NSCLC pilot shows why lower review can be misleading: after prevalence correction, the pooled conformal branch lowers review by releasing more patients, some of whom are event-positive. Within the audit, the classwise branch acts as a scarcity diagnostic: the pilot has too few event labels to certify safe low-review release.
| Comments: | 18 pages, 4 figures, 5 tables |
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG); Computers and Society (cs.CY) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2605.20956 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2605.20956v1 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.20956 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) |
From: Chengze Li [view email]
[v1]
Wed, 20 May 2026 09:44:09 UTC (5,288 KB)
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理,仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。