Thanks, Kartik! Apologies for a long response. The CI analogy makes sense - one summary number can hide quite a lot.

In my experiment Platt scaling produced the large improvement, reducing ECE from 16.64 to 1.31 percentage points, however the temperature scaling only brought it down to 15.28. Both methods kept the boxes and rankings unchanged.

I haven’t tested adaptive-width bins in this experiment, so I can’t say they caught something the fixed bins missed. I did check 10, 15, and 20 equal-width bins: YOLO26n’s original ECE stayed at 16.64 points across all three. That confirms underconfidence finding, but still doesn’t really establish how sensitive the corrected result is to binning.

Thank you, comparing equal-count bins would be a useful follow-up, especially in the high-confidence region.