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

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.13413 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.13413/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 8 of its 35 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 15 Jul 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [Revisiting Deep Learning Models for Tabular Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.11959/) (2021)
- [TabNet: Attentive Interpretable Tabular Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.07442/) (2019)
- [Tabular Data: Deep Learning is Not All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.03253/) (2021)
- [Deep Neural Networks and Tabular Data: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.01889/) (2021)
- [SAINT: Improved Neural Networks for Tabular Data via Row Attention and Contrastive Pre-Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.01342/) (2021)
- [On Embeddings for Numerical Features in Tabular Deep Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.05556/) (2022)
- [Well-tuned Simple Nets Excel on Tabular Datasets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.11189/) (2021)
- [A Benchmarking Study of Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks on Tabular Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.14529/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This study presents an empirical benchmarking comparison between Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks (KANs) and Multi-Layer Perceptrons (MLPs) on structured tabular classification tasks. Motivated by the growing interest in KANs as an alternative function-approximating architecture, we evaluate their out-of-the-box performance on twelve publicly available datasets spanning binary, multiclass, multilabel, and ordinal problems. Both models were trained under standardized preprocessing, architecture, and fixed hyperparameter settings, with performance assessed using test accuracy and F1-Score, paired hypothesis testing, and effect size analysis. Results show that KANs statistically outperform MLPs in binary and multiclass domains and achieve a significant aggregate advantage across all datasets. However, the observed medium effect size (d = -0.46) raises an important cost-benefit consideration: while KANs offer superior generalization through adaptive spline-based mappings, this advantage comes with substantially higher parameter and computational complexity relative to the MLP baseline. These findings suggest KANs are the preferred choice for high-precision applications, while MLPs remain a robust and efficient option for resource-constrained environments. Future work should extend this analysis to additional data modalities to further refine these architectural selection criteria.
