arXiv AI

LLMs on Tabular Data with Limited Semantics: Evidence from Industrial Car Retrofit Prediction

arXiv:2606. 15314v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Industrial retrofit planning depends on structured operational data rather than free text: planners must estimate whether a newly registered prototype will require a retrofit, which retrofit package it will need, and how long the work will take.

arXiv Machine Learning
4d ago

TabFM: A Zero-Shot Foundation Model for Tabular Data

arXiv:2609.37959v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tabular machine learning typically relies on per-dataset workflows, fitting tree ensembles or running AutoML searches from scratch for every task. We p...

By Weihao Kong, Erez Louidor Ilan, Shuxin Nie, Taman Narayan, Rajat Sen, Yichen Zhou, Deqing Fu, Samet Oymak, Abhimanyu Das
arXiv AI
Sep 4

Xiaomi-TabLDM: A Tabular Foundation Model Technical Report

Xiaomi-TabLDM is a tabular foundation model that performs classification and regression via in-context learning without task‑specific fine‑tuning. It is pretrained solely on synthetic data from structural causal models, achieving top‑ranked regression results on multiple benchmarks while reducing training and prediction time compared to leading models. The architecture incorporates a three‑stage training strategy, dual‑stream feature grouping, lightweight attention residuals, and sparse mixture‑of‑experts, and it can further improve accuracy through test‑time compute scaling.

By TabLDM Team, Penghui Wang, Wei Liu, Hong Wang, Chengyue Huang, Yuxi Sun, Zirui Wang, Hongming Huang, Quan Wang, Chunxiao Liu, Erli Meng, Bin Wang
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 17

TabPFN-3.5: Technical Report

The report introduces TabPFN‑3.5, a new flagship tabular foundation model that outperforms its predecessor TabPFN‑3 and all existing baselines on a wide range of tabular tasks. It achieves state‑of‑the‑art performance on standard tabular prediction in TabArena and extends to practical scenarios such as non‑i.i.d. data, temporal or grouped splits, tables containing strings, text, images, high‑cardinality categorical features, and wide tables. Variants like TabPFN‑3.5‑Fast, TabPFN‑3.5‑Plus, and TabPFN‑3.5‑Thinking offer faster inference, expanded multimodal capabilities, and further speed improvements up to 12× faster than the previous Thinking mode.

By Benjamin J\"ager, Nick Erickson, L\'eo Grinsztajn, Felix Birkel, Klemens Fl\"oge, Oscar Key, K\"ur\c{s}at Kaya, Jonas K\"ubler, Ad\`ele Frankel, Tobias Schr\"oder, Anurag Garg, Jan Hendrik Metzen, David Salinas, Simon Bing, Kristina Collins, Tuana \c{C}elik, Vahid Balazadeh, Lydia Sidhoum, Tom\'as Pereda, Brendan Roof, Andrej Tschalzev, Siyuan Guo, Philipp Singer, Lennart Purucker, Jake Robertson, Marie Salmon, Philipp Jund, Jerry Chen, Diana Kriuchkova, Arthur Cahu, Eliott Kalfon, Adrian Hayler, Georg Grab, Vitor Monteiro, Lilly Wehrhahn, Dominik Safaric, Clara Cornu, Alan Arazi, Rylee Grace, Simone Alessi, Mihir Manium, Bernhard Sch\"olkopf, Yann LeCun, Madelon Hulsebos, Sauraj Gambhir, Noah Hollmann, Frank Hutter
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 14

TabH2O: A Unified Foundation Model for Tabular Prediction

arXiv:2605. 18383v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We present TabH2O, a foundation model for tabular data that performs classification and regression in a single forward pass via in-context learning.

By Pascal Pfeiffer, Dmitry Gordeev, Mathias M\"uller, Laura Fink, Joan Salv\`a Soler, Mark Landry, Branden Murray, Marcos V. Conde, Sri Satish Ambati
arXiv AI
Sep 18

Is It Still Worth Training a Classical Model in the Era of LLMs? A Crossover Benchmark on Tabular Data

The paper investigates whether training classical machine learning models remains worthwhile when large language models (LLMs) can label tabular data without training. By defining a labeled‑data crossover point (N*) where a trained classical model surpasses a frozen LLM’s flat error, the authors analyze 126 student evaluations of GPT models across 18 datasets and compare them to power‑law learning curves of six classical model families. Results show that in 86% of cases a classical model outperforms the LLM with no more labeled data than already available, and the crossover occurs at a median of about 6% of the training set, suggesting that collecting a few hundred labels and training a gradient‑boosted model is typically advantageous.

By Kaihua Ding
arXiv Machine Learning
2d ago

Synthesis Without Training: An Inference-Only Pipeline for Tabular, Temporal, and Relational Synthetic Data

GENSCRIPT is an inference‑only pipeline that generates synthetic data without training a generative model. It creates a deterministic statistical profile of the source data, uses a language model to infer field semantics and cross‑column constraints, and then compiles these into an executable sampler that works for single‑table, temporal, and relational data. The method builds generators in minutes, samples large datasets quickly, and achieves fidelity comparable to leading methods while preserving key data relationships such as 1‑to‑1 mappings and primary‑foreign key constraints.

By Zilong Zhao, Abdul Raheem, Jiayu Li, Sohei Arisaka, Darius Lim Hong Yi, Milad Abdollahzadeh, Uzair Javaid, Biplab Sikdar