Confidence Thresholding

Description

Confidence thresholding creates decision boundaries based on model uncertainty scores, routing predictions into different handling workflows depending on their confidence levels. High-confidence predictions (e.g., above 95%) proceed automatically, whilst medium-confidence cases (e.g., 70-95%) may trigger additional validation or human review, and low-confidence predictions (below 70%) receive extensive oversight or default to conservative fallback actions. This technique enables organisations to maintain automated efficiency for clear-cut cases whilst ensuring appropriate human intervention for uncertain decisions, balancing operational speed with risk management across safety-critical applications.

Example Use Cases

Safety

Implementing tiered confidence thresholds in autonomous vehicle decision-making where high-confidence lane changes (>98%) execute automatically, medium-confidence decisions (85-98%) trigger additional sensor verification, and low-confidence situations (<85%) engage conservative defensive driving modes or request human takeover.

Reliability

Deploying confidence thresholding in fraud detection systems where high-confidence legitimate transactions (>90%) process immediately, medium-confidence cases (70-90%) undergo additional automated checks, and low-confidence transactions (<70%) require human analyst review, ensuring system reliability through graduated response mechanisms.

Transparency

Using confidence thresholds in automated loan decisions to provide clear explanations to applicants, where high-confidence approvals include simple explanations, medium-confidence decisions provide detailed reasoning about key factors, and low-confidence cases receive comprehensive explanations with guidance on potential improvements.

Limitations

Many models produce poorly calibrated confidence scores that don't accurately reflect true prediction uncertainty, leading to overconfident predictions for incorrect outputs or underconfident scores for correct predictions.
Threshold selection requires careful calibration and domain expertise, as inappropriate thresholds can either overwhelm human reviewers with too many cases or miss genuinely uncertain decisions that need oversight.
High-confidence predictions may still be incorrect or harmful, particularly when models encounter adversarial inputs, out-of-distribution data, or systematic biases that the confidence mechanism doesn't detect.
Static thresholds may become inappropriate over time as model performance degrades, data distribution shifts occur, or operational contexts change, requiring ongoing monitoring and adjustment.
Implementation complexity increases significantly when managing multiple confidence levels and routing mechanisms, potentially introducing system failures or inconsistencies in how different confidence ranges are handled.

Resources

A Novel Dynamic Confidence Threshold Estimation AI Algorithm for Enhanced Object Detection

Research Paper•Mounika Thatikonda, M. Pk, and Fathi H. Amsaad

Improving speech recognition accuracy with multi-confidence thresholding

Research Paper•Shuangyu Chang

Improving the Robustness and Generalization of Deep Neural Network with Confidence Threshold Reduction

Research Paper•Xiangyuan Yang et al.•Jun 2, 2022

Related Techniques

Name	Description	Assurance Goals
Calibration with Equality of Opportunity	A post-processing fairness technique that adjusts model predictions to achieve equal true positive rates across protected groups whilst maintaining calibration within each group. The method addresses fairness by ensuring that qualified individuals from different demographic groups have equal chances of receiving positive predictions, whilst preserving the meaning of probability scores within each group. This technique attempts to balance the competing objectives of group fairness and accurate probability estimation.	Fairness Transparency Reliability
RuleFit	RuleFit is a method that creates an interpretable model by combining linear terms with decision rules. It first extracts potential rules from ensemble trees, then builds a sparse linear model where those rules (binary conditions) and original features are used as predictors, with regularization to keep the model simple. The final model is a linear combination of a small set of rules and original features, balancing interpretability with predictive power.	Explainability Transparency
Runtime Monitoring and Circuit Breakers	Runtime monitoring and circuit breakers establish continuous surveillance of AI/ML systems in production, tracking critical metrics such as prediction accuracy, response times, input characteristics, output distributions, and system resource usage. When monitored parameters exceed predefined safety thresholds or exhibit anomalous patterns, automated circuit breakers immediately trigger protective actions including request throttling, service degradation, system shutdown, or failover to backup mechanisms. This approach provides real-time defensive capabilities that prevent cascading failures, ensure consistent service reliability, and maintain transparent operation status for stakeholders monitoring system health.	Safety Reliability Transparency
Safety Envelope Testing	Safety envelope testing systematically evaluates AI system performance at the boundaries of its intended operational domain to identify potential failure modes before deployment. The technique involves defining the system's operational design domain (ODD), creating test scenarios that approach or exceed these boundaries, and measuring performance degradation as conditions become more challenging. By testing edge cases, environmental extremes, and boundary conditions, it reveals where the system transitions from safe to unsafe operation, enabling the establishment of clear operational limits and safety margins for deployment.	Safety Reliability
ANCHOR	ANCHOR generates high-precision if-then rules that explain individual predictions by identifying the minimal set of feature conditions that guarantee a specific prediction with high confidence. It searches for 'anchor' conditions (e.g., 'age > 30 AND income < £50k') that ensure the model gives the same prediction at least 95% of the time when those conditions are met. This creates human-readable rules that users can trust as sufficient conditions for understanding why a particular decision was made.	Explainability Transparency
Homomorphic Encryption	Homomorphic encryption allows computation on encrypted data without decrypting it first, producing encrypted results that, when decrypted, match the results of performing the same operations on the plaintext. This enables secure outsourced computation where sensitive data remains encrypted throughout processing. By allowing ML operations on encrypted data, it provides strong privacy guarantees for applications involving highly sensitive information.	Privacy Safety Transparency Security