Distribution-free uncertainty quantification for inverse problems: Application to weak lensing mass mapping

Aims. In inverse problems, the aim of distribution-free uncertainty quantification (UQ) is to obtain error bars in the reconstruction with coverage guarantees that are independent of any prior assumptions about the data distribution. This allows for a better understanding of how intermediate errors introduced during the process affect subsequent stages and ultimately influence the final reconstruction. In the context of mass mapping, uncertainties could lead to errors that affect how the underlying mass distribution is understood or that propagate to cosmological parameter estimation, thereby impacting the precision and reliability of cosmological models. Current surveys, such as Euclid or Rubin , will provide new weak lensing datasets of very high quality. Accurately quantifying uncertainties in mass maps is therefore critical to fully exploit their scientific potential and to perform reliable cosmological parameter inference. Methods. In this paper, we extend the conformalized quantile regression (CQR) algorithm, initially proposed for scalar regression, to inverse problems. We compared our approach with another distribution-free approach based on risk-controlling prediction sets (RCPS). Both methods are based on a calibration dataset, and they offer finite-sample coverage guarantees that are independent of the data distribution. Furthermore, they are applicable to any mass mapping method, including black box predictors. In our experiments, we applied UQ to three mass-mapping methods: the Kaiser-Squires inversion, iterative Wiener filtering, and the MCALens algorithm. Results. Our experiments reveal that RCPS tends to produce overconservative confidence bounds with small calibration sets, whereas CQR is designed to avoid this issue. Although the expected miscoverage rate is guaranteed to stay below a user-prescribed threshold regardless of the mass mapping method, selecting an appropriate reconstruction algorithm remains crucial for obtaining accurate estimates, especially around peak-like structures, which are particularly important for inferring cosmological parameters. Additionally, the choice of mass mapping method influences the size of the error bars.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Published
2025-01-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202451756
Primary Topic
Statistical Methods and Inference
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Distribution-free uncertainty quantification for inverse problems: Application to weak lensing mass mapping

Jalal Fadili, Jean‐Luc Starck, H Leterme
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Statistical Methods and Inference
article

Distribution-free uncertainty quantification for inverse problems: Application to weak lensing mass mapping

Jalal Fadili, Jean‐Luc Starck, H Leterme
article en

Abstract

Aims. In inverse problems, the aim of distribution-free uncertainty quantification (UQ) is to obtain error bars in the reconstruction with coverage guarantees that are independent of any prior assumptions about the data distribution. This allows for a better understanding of how intermediate errors introduced during the process affect subsequent stages and ultimately influence the final reconstruction. In the context of mass mapping, uncertainties could lead to errors that affect how the underlying mass distribution is understood or that propagate to cosmological parameter estimation, thereby impacting the precision and reliability of cosmological models. Current surveys, such as Euclid or Rubin , will provide new weak lensing datasets of very high quality. Accurately quantifying uncertainties in mass maps is therefore critical to fully exploit their scientific potential and to perform reliable cosmological parameter inference. Methods. In this paper, we extend the conformalized quantile regression (CQR) algorithm, initially proposed for scalar regression, to inverse problems. We compared our approach with another distribution-free approach based on risk-controlling prediction sets (RCPS). Both methods are based on a calibration dataset, and they offer finite-sample coverage guarantees that are independent of the data distribution. Furthermore, they are applicable to any mass mapping method, including black box predictors. In our experiments, we applied UQ to three mass-mapping methods: the Kaiser-Squires inversion, iterative Wiener filtering, and the MCALens algorithm. Results. Our experiments reveal that RCPS tends to produce overconservative confidence bounds with small calibration sets, whereas CQR is designed to avoid this issue. Although the expected miscoverage rate is guaranteed to stay below a user-prescribed threshold regardless of the mass mapping method, selecting an appropriate reconstruction algorithm remains crucial for obtaining accurate estimates, especially around peak-like structures, which are particularly important for inferring cosmological parameters. Additionally, the choice of mass mapping method influences the size of the error bars.

Astronomy and AstrophysicsVol. 694
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), École Nationale Supérieure d'Ingénieurs de Caen (FR), Université Paris Cité (FR), Commissariat à l'Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies Alternatives (FR), Université Paris-Saclay (FR), CEA Grenoble (FR), Astrophysique, Instrumentation et Modélisation (FR), Normandie Université (FR), CEA Cadarache (FR), CEA Paris-Saclay (FR), GREYC (FR), Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie (FR), Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas (GR), Université de Caen Normandie (FR)
European Commission, Agence Nationale de la Recherche, HORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme
Openalex Percentile: Top 98%
Statistical Methods and Inference
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.