Multimodal fusion architectures typically assume all modalities are available at inference, yet sensor failures, acquisition variability, and cost constraints routinely produce incomplete observations. Existing work treats modality absence as a prediction-accuracy problem, leaving a more basic question unanswered: whether a model's confidence estimates remain calibrated when an entire input stream is removed. We argue that missing-modality robustness and calibrated uncertainty are a single coupled property, and introduce Modality-Conditioned Conformal Fusion (MCCF), an architecture that addresses both at once. MCCF combines a multimodal bottleneck fusion backbone trained with modality dropout, per-modality evidential heads producing modality-decomposed Dirichlet distributions, and a Dempster-Shafer combination rule that fuses the per-modality evidence into a joint predictive distribution; an absent modality contributes vacuous evidence that is structurally ignored, so the fused uncertainty automatically reflects the reduced information without test-time imputation. A Mondrian conformal calibration module keyed on the modality-presence mask then provides finite-sample group-conditional coverage for every non-empty modality subset. MCCF is, to our knowledge, the first method with formal coverage guarantees under arbitrary modality availability through architectural integration rather than post-hoc recalibration, and the evidential decomposition yields per-modality vacuity scores that localise uncertainty to the absent modality responsible. Across a synthetic problem and three real multimodal benchmarks, MCCF holds its target coverage on every modality-presence subset, substantially narrows the coverage gap between full and partial modalities relative to a marginal split-conformal baseline, and imposes no measurable accuracy cost relative to temperature-scaled and evidential baselines.
Sub-model federated learning lets resource-constrained clients train width-reduced versions of a global model, but existing methods allocate capacity by device resources alone. A natural next step, allocating capacity by each client's data heterogeneity as estimated from the updates the server already observes, has been repeatedly suggested. We ask whether that step is possible, using HAS-FL, an adaptive capacity-allocation framework, as a test case. Our findings are threefold. First, validated against ground-truth label-distribution divergence on reproducible partitions, update-divergence estimates of client heterogeneity are dominated by capacity rather than data: across two corrected estimators, multiple datasets, and all seeds, the estimates correlate strongly and negatively with device capacity, and no data signal remains once capacity is controlled for. This previously undocumented confound affects any method estimating client statistics from sub-model updates. Second, adaptive allocation has a hidden failure mode: when every client is capped below full width, the uncovered parameters stay at random initialization and progressively corrupt the global model. A simple coverage guarantee removes the failure and explains why uniform allocation collapses. Third, a matched-budget control settles what adaptivity contributes: random allocation to the same average budget performs no differently on both image benchmarks, and on the naturally partitioned text benchmark the adaptive policy is the weakest of the three strategies while consuming the most capacity. Sub-model training remains valuable because it admits constrained clients at quadratically reduced cost, but what protects accuracy is parameter coverage rather than allocation intelligence. Its apparent benefits come from capacity budgeting and coverage, and future designs need heterogeneity signals separable from capacity effects.
