Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

A Benchmarking Study of Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks on Tabular Data

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 2406.14529 v1 pith:UYFA34FZ submitted 2024-06-20 cs.LG cs.AI

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

Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks (KANs) have very recently been introduced into the world of machine learning, quickly capturing the attention of the entire community. However, KANs have mostly been tested for approximating complex functions or processing synthetic data, while a test on real-world tabular datasets is currently lacking. In this paper, we present a benchmarking study comparing KANs and Multi-Layer Perceptrons (MLPs) on tabular datasets. The study evaluates task performance and training times. From the results obtained on the various datasets, KANs demonstrate superior or comparable accuracy and F1 scores, excelling particularly in datasets with numerous instances, suggesting robust handling of complex data. We also highlight that this performance improvement of KANs comes with a higher computational cost when compared to MLPs of comparable sizes.

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. Efficiency Bottlenecks of Convolutional Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks: A Comprehensive Scrutiny with ImageNet, AlexNet, LeNet and Tabular Classification

    cs.CV 2025-01 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    CKANs are measurably less efficient than standard CNNs, and on ImageNet the accuracy gap is large, but the paper's baseline and timing comparisons are not controlled.

Pith tools