mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

When Tabular Foundation Models Transfer Across Modalities: A Systematic Evaluation Across 95 Datasets, 7 Modalities, and Two Regimes

arXiv 2606.02106 ↗First posted 1 Jun 2026cs.LG stat.MLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We present a single classification pipeline that combines an Equiangular Tight Frame (ETF) preprocessing stage with a tabular foundation model for in-context inference, applied identically across modalities once data is mapped to fixed vector representations. We evaluate it on 95 datasets spanning seven signal modalities -- vision, audio, speech, text, molecular, time-series, and tabular. The main methodological contribution is to fix the comparison object: throughout the paper, performance is judged against the strongest lightweight tuned baseline on the same frozen features, while oracle selection, deployed selection, and specialized fine-tuning are reported separately. The pipeline is broadly competitive with strong lightweight tuned baselines on the same frozen features. It does not match the very best specialized models or heavily tuned pipelines on every task, but it stays close, and it runs much faster -- typically 4 to 200 times faster than full backbone fine-tuning, often at comparable quality. We describe how to deploy the pipeline in practice: when to apply ETF preprocessing, how to stop its training without a validation split, how to set up the in-context classifier, and how to calibrate the resulting probabilities. The calibration step is non-cosmetic: TabICL produces well-calibrated probabilities by construction, ETF preprocessing initially disrupts that calibration, and the post-hoc rescaling restores it -- yielding a per-prediction confidence signal that practitioners can use as a trust threshold for confidence-gated deployment. We also report where the pipeline should not be expected to help, and how to identify those cases in advance.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Jun 2026.

Builds on

20 of 27 references.

References · 20

  1. 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,166
  2. 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
  3. 2018How Powerful are Graph Neural Networks?cited by 4,393
  4. 2019Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Frameworkcited by 2,501
  5. 2020Open Graph Benchmark: Datasets for Machine Learning on Graphscited by 2,163
  6. 2020TUDataset: A collection of benchmark datasets for learning with graphscited by 728
  7. 2020Prevalence of Neural Collapse during the terminal phase of deep learning trainingcited by 719
  8. 2021AST: Audio Spectrogram Transformercited by 643
  9. 2018Do Better ImageNet Models Transfer Better?cited by 565
  10. 2020ChemBERTa: Large-Scale Self-Supervised Pretraining for Molecular Property Predictioncited by 337
  11. 2025TabICL: A Tabular Foundation Model for In-Context Learning on Large Datacited by 289
  12. 2019A Fair Comparison of Graph Neural Networks for Graph Classificationcited by 244
8 more
  1. 2025TabArena: A Living Benchmark for Machine Learning on Tabular Datacited by 176
  2. 2026TabICLv2: A better, faster, scalable, and open tabular foundation modelcited by 144
  3. 2021On the Role of Neural Collapse in Transfer Learningcited by 100
  4. 2022Inducing Neural Collapse in Imbalanced Learning: Do We Really Need a Learnable Classifier at the End of Deep Neural Network?cited by 100
  5. 2025Bringing Graphs to the Table: Zero-shot Node Classification via Tabular Foundation Modelscited by 16
  6. 2026MultiModalPFN: Extending Prior-Data Fitted Networks for Multimodal Tabular Learningcited by 10
  7. 2026Tabular foundation models for in-context prediction of molecular propertiescited by 6
  8. 2025Superior Molecular Representations from Intermediate Encoder Layerscited by 4

Built on by

Not cited yet.