Ensembling LLM-Induced Decision Trees for Explainable and Robust Error Detection
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Error detection (ED), which aims to identify incorrect or inconsistent cell values in tabular data, is important for ensuring data quality. Recent state-of-the-art ED methods leverage the pre-trained knowledge and semantic capability of large language models (LLMs) to directly label whether a cell is erroneous. However, this LLM-as-a-labeler pipeline produces predictions through an implicit black-box process with limited traceability and explicit justification, and relies on stochastic single-pass inference, resulting in inconsistent and insufficiently robust detections across contexts. To address these limitations, we propose an LLM-as-an-inducer framework that uses an LLM to induce a decision tree for ED, termed TreeED, and ensembles multiple such trees for consensus detection, termed ForestED. Based on prompts derived from data context, decision tree specifications, and output requirements, TreeED queries the LLM to induce a decision tree skeleton whose root-to-leaf paths specify the stepwise procedure for evaluating a sample. Each tree contains three types of nodes: (1) rule nodes that perform simple validation checks, such as format or range constraints; (2) Graph Neural Network (GNN) nodes that capture complex patterns, such as functional dependencies; and (3) leaf nodes that output the final decision as error or clean. ForestED employs uncertainty sampling to obtain multiple informative row subsets and constructs a decision tree for each subset using TreeED. It then applies an Expectation-Maximization-based algorithm to jointly estimate tree reliability and optimize the consensus ED prediction. Experiments demonstrate that our methods are accurate, explainable, and robust, achieving an average F1-score improvement of 16.1% over the best baseline.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Dec 2025.
Builds on
19 of 56 references.
References · 19
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,355
- 2017Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphscited by 6,284
- 2024On LLMs-Driven Synthetic Data Generation, Curation, and Evaluation: A Surveycited by 240
- 2022Can Foundation Models Wrangle Your Data?cited by 173
- 2020Handling Missing Data with Graph Representation Learningcited by 132
- 2024Paths-over-Graph: Knowledge Graph Empowered Large Language Model Reasoningcited by 44
- 2025Walk the Talk? Measuring the Faithfulness of Large Language Model Explanationscited by 44
- 2024Match, Compare, or Select? An Investigation of Large Language Models for Entity Matchingcited by 32
- 2019HoloDetect: Few-Shot Learning for Error Detectioncited by 31
- 2023Jellyfish: A Large Language Model for Data Preprocessingcited by 20
- 2025Exploring LLM Agents for Cleaning Tabular Machine Learning Datasetscited by 20
- 2024Schema Matching with Large Language Models: an Experimental Studycited by 19
7 more
- 2024GPTree: Towards Explainable Decision-Making via LLM-powered Decision Treescited by 13
- 2025On LLM-Enhanced Mixed-Type Data Imputation with High-Order Message Passingcited by 11
- 2024The ALCHEmist: Automated Labeling 500x CHEaper Than LLM Data Annotatorscited by 10
- 2025Few-shot LLM Synthetic Data with Distribution Matchingcited by 9
- 2024"Oh LLM, I'm Asking Thee, Please Give Me a Decision Tree": Zero-Shot Decision Tree Induction and Embedding with Large Language Modelscited by 6
- 2025CORTEX: A Cost-Sensitive Rule and Tree Extraction Methodcited by 1
- 2025RCScore: Quantifying Response Consistency in Large Language Modelscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.