Papers › Normalizing Flow Ensembles for Rich Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty Modeling
Normalizing Flow Ensembles for Rich Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty Modeling
Lucas Berry, David Meger
In this work, we demonstrate how to reliably estimate epistemic uncertainty while maintaining the flexibility needed to capture complicated aleatoric distributions. To this end, we propose an ensemble of Normalizing Flows (NF), which are state-of-the-art in modeling aleatoric uncertainty. The ensembles are created via sets of fixed dropout masks, making them less expensive than creating separate NF models. We demonstrate how to leverage the unique structure of NFs, base distributions, to estimate aleatoric uncertainty without relying on samples, provide a comprehensive set of baselines, and derive unbiased estimates for differential entropy. The methods were applied to a variety of experiments, commonly used to benchmark aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty estimation: 1D sinusoidal data, 2D windy grid-world (Wet Chicken), Pendulum, and Hopper. In these experiments, we setup an active learning framework and evaluate each model's capability at measuring aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty. The results show the advantages of using NF ensembles in capturing complicated aleatoric while maintaining accurate epistemic uncertainty estimates.
In Syntology View this paper on Syntology: its repositories, every harvested function with whether it ran, its licence and the call to fetch it.
Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections