Sari la conținut

Română · beta. Traducerea a fost făcută automat și este încă în curs de revizuire. Citește pagina în engleză

perspectiva aiqbenchCercetare AI

analiza aiqbench

This arXiv preprint tests whether LLMs can automatically build simple baselines to check deep learning claims in the physical and life sciences. Across 36 supervised tasks from high-profile journals, the generated baselines recovered a median of 95.5% of the gap between a trivial predictor and the published model, and matched or beat the published model in 12 studies. The sample is limited to supervised tasks from a few venues, and the paper is not yet peer reviewed, so the results indicate a promising audit tool rather than a settled replacement for expert review.
Surse care acoperăarXiv, Latent Space

Automatic Construction of Strong Simple Baselines

arXiv3 min de cititArticolul și perspectiva sunt în engleză.

arXiv:2610.40700v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: To rigorously establish the value of a novel deep learning method, it must be compared against appropriate baselines. As deep learning has become increasingly common in the physical and life sciences, there have been numerous cases in which apparent progress has turned out to be an artifact of omitted or missing baselines. In this work, we investigate whether this problem can be mitigated by using large language models to automate the construction of baselines. We assemble 36 supervised classification and regression tasks from peer-reviewed studies in Nature, Science, and Cell-family journals that investigate novel deep learning methods for scientific applications. We then use a language model to construct simple baselines for each task. These automatically constructed baselines are strong, recovering a median of 95.5% (mean 85.7%) of the gap between a trivial predictor and the score of the deep learning model. The median simple baseline matches or exceeds the performance of the deep learning model in 12 studies. We further examine the variation across scientific domains and publication venues and we characterize the effects of test-time compute and access to different levels of study context. As human peer review has struggled to keep up with the rapidly increasing volume of research articles in recent years, our results suggest that automated baseline construction is a practical and scalable check on deep learning contributions in the physical and life sciences.

Abstract:To rigorously establish the value of a novel deep learning method, it must be compared against appropriate baselines. As deep learning has become increasingly common in the physical and life sciences, there have been numerous cases in which apparent progress has turned out to be an artifact of omitted or missing baselines. In this work, we investigate whether this problem can be mitigated by using large language models to automate the construction of baselines. We assemble 36 supervised classification and regression tasks from peer-reviewed studies in Nature, Science, and Cell-family journals that investigate novel deep learning methods for scientific applications. We then use a language model to construct simple baselines for each task. These automatically constructed baselines are strong, recovering a median of 95.5% (mean 85.7%) of the gap between a trivial predictor and the score of the deep learning model. The median simple baseline matches or exceeds the performance of the deep learning model in 12 studies. We further examine the variation across scientific domains and publication venues and we characterize the effects of test-time compute and access to different levels of study context. As human peer review has struggled to keep up with the rapidly increasing volume of research articles in recent years, our results suggest that automated baseline construction is a practical and scalable check on deep learning contributions in the physical and life sciences.

Machine Learning (cs.LG); Quantitative Methods (q-bio.QM)

arXiv:2610.40700 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2610.40700v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.40700 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.

Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 325 cuvinte

Subiecte conexe