MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluating Kolmogorov–Arnold Networks for Scientific Discovery: A Simple Yet Effective Approach

2024· preprint· en· W4401974444 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputability, Logic, AI Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimple (philosophy)Scientific discoveryComputer scienceData sciencePsychologyCognitive scienceEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kolmogorov–Arnold Network (KAN) is an emerging interpretable neural network compared to fully black-box MLPs. Recently, emerging works focus on comprehensive and fair comparisons between KAN and MLP in various tasks. However, these works didn't focus on the strongest advantage of KAN: generating symbolic outputs. The ability of KAN to provide scientific insights or even discover new science is under-examined. In this work, we propose several novel metrics to measure how well a KAN performs on symbolic function fitting: R^2-Mean, weighted R^2-complexity loss, and ranking metrics. We also propose a metric to determine mathematical complexity of a target function and evaluate KAN with several functions of different mathematical complexity. Additionally, we also tried inputs with different ranges to find the effect of normalization.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.645
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0050.029
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.173
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it