Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Propagation of Uncertainty from Random Error00:59

Propagation of Uncertainty from Random Error

1.5K
An experiment often consists of more than a single step. In this case, measurements at each step give rise to uncertainty. Because the measurements occur in successive steps, the uncertainty in one step necessarily contributes to that in the subsequent step. As we perform statistical analysis on these types of experiments, we must learn to account for the propagation of uncertainty from one step to the next. The propagation of uncertainty depends on the type of arithmetic operation performed on...
1.5K
Uncertainty: Confidence Intervals00:54

Uncertainty: Confidence Intervals

9.1K
The confidence interval is the range of values around the mean that contains the true mean. It is expressed as a probability percentage. The interpretation of a 95% confidence interval, for instance, is that the statistician is 95% confident that the true mean falls within the interval. The upper and lower limits of this range are known as confidence limits. The confidence limits for the true mean are estimated from the sample's mean, the standard deviation, and the statistical factor...
9.1K
Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error01:10

Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error

1.1K
The atomic mass of an element varies due to the relative ratio of its isotopes. A sample's relative proportion of oxygen isotopes influences its average atomic mass. For instance, if we were to measure the atomic mass of oxygen from a sample, the mass would be a weighted average of the isotopic masses of oxygen in that sample. Since a single sample is not likely to perfectly reflect the true atomic mass of oxygen for all the molecules of oxygen on Earth, the mass we obtain from this...
1.1K
Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision03:37

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

98.6K
Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value. 
98.6K
Uncertainty: Overview00:59

Uncertainty: Overview

1.3K
In analytical chemistry, we often perform repetitive measurements to detect and minimize inaccuracies caused by both determinate and indeterminate errors. Despite the cares we take, the presence of random errors means that repeated measurements almost never have exactly the same magnitude. The collective difference between these measurements - observed values - and the estimated or expected value is called uncertainty. Uncertainty is conventionally written after the estimated or expected value.
1.3K
Prediction Intervals01:03

Prediction Intervals

2.9K
The interval estimate of any variable is known as the prediction interval. It helps decide if a point estimate is dependable.
However, the point estimate is most likely not the exact value of the population parameter, but close to it. After calculating point estimates, we construct interval estimates, called confidence intervals or prediction intervals. This prediction interval comprises a range of values unlike the point estimate and is a better predictor of the observed sample value, y. 
2.9K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

A Maximum Entropy Model of the Distribution of Dengue Serotype in Mexico.

Transboundary and emerging diseases·2025
Same author

Correction: Bridging the simulation-to-real gap for AI-based needle and target detection in robot-assisted ultrasound-guided interventions.

European radiology experimental·2023
Same author

Bridging the simulation-to-real gap for AI-based needle and target detection in robot-assisted ultrasound-guided interventions.

European radiology experimental·2023
Same author

Automated Data Annotation for 6-DoF AI-Based Navigation Algorithm Development.

Journal of imaging·2021
Same author

From a Point Cloud to a Simulation Model-Bayesian Segmentation and Entropy Based Uncertainty Estimation for 3D Modelling.

Entropy (Basel, Switzerland)·2021

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Dec 3, 2025

Deep Neural Networks for Image-Based Dietary Assessment
13:19

Deep Neural Networks for Image-Based Dietary Assessment

Published on: March 13, 2021

9.8K

Measuring the Uncertainty of Predictions in Deep Neural Networks with Variational Inference.

Jan Steinbrener1,2, Konstantin Posch3, Jürgen Pilz3

  • 1Control of Networked Systems Group, Department of Smart Systems Technologies, Universität Klagenfurt, Universitätsstr 65-67, 9020 Klagenfurt, Austria.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)
|October 29, 2020
PubMed
Summary

This study introduces a novel Bayesian deep learning method for quantifying uncertainty with minimal added parameters. The approach reduces test error by 15% and improves classification accuracy, enabling better model optimization.

Keywords:
Bayesian deep learningimage classificationmodel uncertaintyvariational inference

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Dec 3, 2025

Deep Neural Networks for Image-Based Dietary Assessment
13:19

Deep Neural Networks for Image-Based Dietary Assessment

Published on: March 13, 2021

9.8K

Area of Science:

  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Machine Learning
  • Computational Statistics

Background:

  • Deep neural networks (DNNs) often lack uncertainty quantification, limiting their reliability in critical applications.
  • Existing Bayesian deep learning methods can be computationally expensive and require optimizing many parameters.
  • Accurate uncertainty estimation is crucial for robust decision-making and model diagnostics.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To develop an efficient Bayesian approach for training deep neural networks.
  • To enable reliable uncertainty quantification in model parameters with minimal overhead.
  • To demonstrate the practical benefits of the proposed method in classification tasks.

Main Methods:

  • A novel variational inference technique is employed to approximate the posterior distribution of network parameters.
  • The approach represents posterior uncertainty per network layer, dependent on estimated parameter expectations.
  • This results in optimizing only a few additional parameters compared to standard deep learning models.

Main Results:

  • Achieved a 15% reduction in test error compared to classical deep learning on the MNIST dataset.
  • Demonstrated the ability to compute credible intervals for predictions, aiding in uncertainty assessment.
  • Obtained an average accuracy of 0.92 on a custom dataset using the GoogLeNet architecture, with 95% credible intervals detecting nearly all misclassifications.

Conclusions:

  • The proposed Bayesian deep learning method offers an efficient way to quantify parameter uncertainty.
  • The approach effectively reduces errors and enhances prediction reliability, applicable to large-scale networks.
  • Uncertainty information can guide network architecture optimization and improve overall model performance.