arXiv — Machine Learning · · 3 min read

Quantifying Protocol-Induced Uncertainty in Comparative Predictive-Model Evaluation: Evidence from Large-Scale Daily PM10 Forecasting

Mirrored from arXiv — Machine Learning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.

Computer Science > Machine Learning

arXiv:2609.26288 (cs)
[Submitted on 26 Aug 2026]

Title:Quantifying Protocol-Induced Uncertainty in Comparative Predictive-Model Evaluation: Evidence from Large-Scale Daily PM10 Forecasting

View a PDF of the paper titled Quantifying Protocol-Induced Uncertainty in Comparative Predictive-Model Evaluation: Evidence from Large-Scale Daily PM10 Forecasting, by Rafael da Silva and 1 other authors
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:Comparative studies of predictive models often end by ranking candidate models, yet these rankings depend on evaluation protocols whose influence is rarely treated as a source of uncertainty. We formalize this problem as protocol-induced ranking uncertainty and introduce a framework that compares ranking displacement caused by switching protocols with displacement produced by conventional choices within a fixed protocol. We quantify these effects using the Protocol Sensitivity Score (PSS) and a full-refit intraprotocol reference.
We validate the framework in a large-scale sequential prediction study of daily PM10. Static-split and rolling-origin evaluation are compared across 425 European background stations and 365 US EPA monitors. Switching protocols produces mean PSS values of 0.801 and 0.772 and changes the selected model at 35.3% and 31.5% of stations, respectively. In Europe, intraprotocol perturbations with identical scored targets produce PSS values of 0.072 and 0.230, with winner-swap rates of 0.8% and 4.9%. Between-protocol displacement is therefore substantially larger than the selected within-protocol references. Expanding the candidate set from three to nine models increases the between-protocol winner-swap rate to 60.2% in Europe. The pattern also persists under a frozen protocol applied to held-out background and non-background stations. These results show that model-selection conclusions can depend materially on legitimate evaluation choices. We recommend reporting ranking stability under a small set of defensible intraprotocol perturbations alongside claims of model superiority.
Comments: 29 pages, 8 figures, 7 tables
Subjects: Machine Learning (cs.LG)
Cite as: arXiv:2609.26288 [cs.LG]
  (or arXiv:2609.26288v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.26288
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Rafael Da Silva [view email]
[v1] Wed, 26 Aug 2026 02:33:57 UTC (2,985 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled Quantifying Protocol-Induced Uncertainty in Comparative Predictive-Model Evaluation: Evidence from Large-Scale Daily PM10 Forecasting, by Rafael da Silva and 1 other authors
  • View PDF
  • HTML (experimental)
  • TeX Source

Current browse context:

cs.LG
< prev   |   next >
Change to browse by:
cs

References & Citations

Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

loading...
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy Reddit
Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
IArxiv recommender toggle
IArxiv Recommender (What is IArxiv?)
About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.

Sign in →

No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.

More from arXiv — Machine Learning