Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Well-tuned Simple Nets Excel on Tabular Datasets

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2106.11189 v2 pith:EVHTOUBV submitted 2021-06-21 cs.LG

classification cs.LG
keywords datasetsneuralregularizationtabulararchitecturesdecisionevenjoint
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Tabular datasets are the last "unconquered castle" for deep learning, with traditional ML methods like Gradient-Boosted Decision Trees still performing strongly even against recent specialized neural architectures. In this paper, we hypothesize that the key to boosting the performance of neural networks lies in rethinking the joint and simultaneous application of a large set of modern regularization techniques. As a result, we propose regularizing plain Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) networks by searching for the optimal combination/cocktail of 13 regularization techniques for each dataset using a joint optimization over the decision on which regularizers to apply and their subsidiary hyperparameters. We empirically assess the impact of these regularization cocktails for MLPs in a large-scale empirical study comprising 40 tabular datasets and demonstrate that (i) well-regularized plain MLPs significantly outperform recent state-of-the-art specialized neural network architectures, and (ii) they even outperform strong traditional ML methods, such as XGBoost.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Is the Statistical Advantage Worth the Cost? An Empirical Comparison of KANs and MLPs for Structured Data Classification

    cs.LG 2026-07 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    Across 12 fixed-hyperparameter tabular benchmarks, KANs beat MLPs on 9/12 datasets in accuracy and 10/12 in F1, yet cost ~16x parameters; the paper's significance tests are internally inconsistent.

Pith tools