Good Papers

Prediction-Powered Active Testing

PPAT combines unbiased LURE estimation with prediction-powered control variates and adaptive acquisition to reduce label variance, yielding valid confidence intervals with fewer labels.

Kianoosh Ashouritaklimi, Valentin Kilian, Daolang Huang, Thomas Rainforth, Francois Caron

Published 2026Paris Poster Session 2 · Wed, Dec 9, 5:00 PM–7:00 PM local time · Paris Poster HallarXiv ↗OpenReview ↗

76%
OverallHighly rated
?
OverallHighly ratedVote to see the scoreThe exact score shows once you've voted, so every vote is your own call. The first half of each home page shelf shows its scores.
Readers
–

Only vote on papers you've read. Sign in with GitHub to vote.

AI panel10/20reviewers recommend it
lenient 4/5
medium 5/10
strict 1/5
AI panel?Vote to see what the 20 AI reviewers said

Abstract

Active testing provides a label--efficient approach to risk estimation by adaptively selecting which test points should be labelled. However, existing estimators fail to exploit the informative predictions of powerful black--box models, even though such predictions are increasingly available in settings where labels remain expensive. To address this, we propose \textbf{Prediction--Powered Active Testing (PPAT)}, a novel label--efficient risk estimation framework that combines the unbiased LURE estimator \citep{farquhar2021statistical} with a prediction--powered control variate. Rather than using proxy predictions as biased pseudo--labels, PPAT uses them to residualise the loss, preserving unbiasedness while reducing variance. Beyond the estimator itself, PPAT also changes which points should be acquired: we derive oracle and practical surrogate--based acquisition rules tailored to reducing the variance of our estimator. Moreover, we establish asymptotic normality for PPAT, yielding asymptotically valid confidence intervals and thus a principled estimate of the uncertainty around our estimates. Across tabular regression and image--classification tasks, PPAT outperforms existing methods in risk estimation, while its confidence intervals attain the target coverage with substantially fewer labels and smaller widths.