Open-source tabular model validation toolkit TanML needs feedback [D]
Summary
TanML is an MIT-licensed automated model-validation toolkit for tabular machine-learning models, designed for regulated environments. The developers seek feedback on its features and reports.
Similar Articles
TabularMath: Understanding Math Reasoning over Tables with Large Language Models
TabularMath introduces a benchmark and AutoT2T framework for evaluating LLMs' mathematical reasoning over tabular data, revealing that table complexity, data quality, and modality significantly impact model performance. The study addresses a gap in LLM evaluation by systematically assessing robustness to incomplete or inconsistent table information in real-world scenarios.
Xiaomi-TabLDM: A Tabular Foundation Model Technical Report
Introduces Xiaomi-TabLDM, a tabular foundation model that leverages synthetic data and in-context learning for superior prediction accuracy without task-specific fine-tuning, achieving top rankings on multiple benchmarks.
A Comparative Framework for Evaluating Foundation Models on Tabular Data: A Case Study in Healthcare
This paper introduces OpTFM, a comparative evaluation framework for tabular foundation models in healthcare, assessing models across six clinically meaningful dimensions like generalization and fairness, and applies it to two use cases to demonstrate context-dependent rankings.
TriVAL: A Tri-Validation Framework for Faithful Automatic Optimization Modeling
TriVAL introduces a tri-validation framework that performs explicit validation at three stages of automatic optimization modeling (semantic specification, mathematical formulation, code generation) to improve faithfulness, and also presents NL4COP, a new benchmark for combinatorial optimization problems.
A Multi-Domain Red Teaming Framework for Safety, Robustness, and Fairness Evaluation of Medical Large Language Models
This paper presents a multi-domain red teaming framework for evaluating safety, robustness, and fairness of medical LLMs across 690 clinically grounded scenarios. Results show that high aggregate accuracy can mask critical failures, and hybrid evaluation with clinician oversight is necessary for credible safety assessment.