Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This research exposes critical inconsistencies in Tabular Foundation Models (TFMs), revealing that they fail fundamental probabilistic requirements like marginalization and factorization consistency across all tested datasets. The findings suggest a significant gap between current autoregressive construction methods and the faithful representation of true joint distributions, challenging their reliability for rigorous predictive tasks without further architectural corrections.
Sources coveringarXiv, MarkTechPost, Quantum Computing Report
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Do Tabular Foundation Models Agree with Themselves?

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2608.06004v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tabular Foundation Models (TFMs) are currently the best approach to tabular prediction problems. They are constructed as transformers that approximate the Bayesian posterior predictive distribution based on a pre-training prior. These univariate predictors can be converted into multivariate ones autoregressively by sampling one target and adding it to the features. However, the faithfulness of the resulting joint has not been investigated. Furthermore, TFMs cannot be evaluated against the posterior itself, at least not on real-world datasets, because the ground-truth distribution is unknown. We therefore propose asking a different question: could a model's predictions result from any joint distribution? To answer this question, we pose two requirements that any such model must satisfy. The first is marginalization consistency, which demands that marginalized conditionals are equal to directly predicted marginals. The second is factorization consistency, which demands that different factorization orders result in equal joint distributions. Every TFM that we evaluate violates both of these requirements for both classification and regression across all datasets.

Title:Do Tabular Foundation Models Agree with Themselves?

Abstract:Tabular Foundation Models (TFMs) are currently the best approach to tabular prediction problems. They are constructed as transformers that approximate the Bayesian posterior predictive distribution based on a pre-training prior. These univariate predictors can be converted into multivariate ones autoregressively by sampling one target and adding it to the features. However, the faithfulness of the resulting joint has not been investigated. Furthermore, TFMs cannot be evaluated against the posterior itself, at least not on real-world datasets, because the ground-truth distribution is unknown. We therefore propose asking a different question: could a model's predictions result from any joint distribution? To answer this question, we pose two requirements that any such model must satisfy. The first is marginalization consistency, which demands that marginalized conditionals are equal to directly predicted marginals. The second is factorization consistency, which demands that different factorization orders result in equal joint distributions. Every TFM that we evaluate violates both of these requirements for both classification and regression across all datasets.

Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2608.06004 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2608.06004v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.06004 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 263 words

Related coverage