ML Reads

Personal arXiv list

ML papers to read today.

Pick a topic and keep a small daily list of papers worth opening.

Refresh queueDaily mix

Today's queue

5 papers

#01Nov 10, 2026

cs.LG

Accurate predictions of properties of energetic materials with tabular foundation models

Vagn Krister Nes Glomsrud, Mathias Bynke, Lars Henry Berge Olsen and 1 more

We use TabPFN, a recently developed tabular foundation model, to predict three properties of energetic materials: impact sensitivity, decomposition temperature and crystal density. Without any hyperparameter tuning, TabPFN outperforms the best published models for all three properties. It also substantially outperforms a wide range of established machine-learning models, including tuned gradient boosting (XGBoost), random forests and Gaussian processes. This holds both when the models are given hand-crafted molecular descriptors and when they are given learned representations from Chemprop's message-passing neural network. In particular, for all three properties, TabPFN applied to Chemprop's own embedding is more accurate than Chemprop's predictions. TabPFN is also among the fastest models we consider, more than an order of magnitude faster than XGBoost. As TabPFN predicts the entire distribution of the target rather than just a single value, it offers built-in uncertainty quantification, which we compare with the empirical distributions of compounds with repeated measurements. Finally, we interpret the predictions using Shapley values, which rank the features by their importance.

#02Nov 10, 2026

cs.LG

TimeSeek: Multi-Task and Multi-Domain Pretraining for Generalized Time Series Analytics

Peng Chen, Yihang Wang, Zhongwen Rao and 6 more

Time series analytics has been widely applied across various domains. While existing time series foundation models (TSFMs) have demonstrated promising results, they still face two major challenges: 1) Most TSFMs mainly rely on stacking Transformer layers to increase parameter size, lacking the ability to adaptively model complex time series patterns from multi-domain data. 2) Current TSFMs are primarily pre-trained for specific tasks, e.g., forecasting or anomaly detection, and a few models support multiple tasks, but they fail to fully leverage task specificity and commonality, resulting in suboptimal performance. To address these challenges, we propose TimeSeek, a novel generalized time series analytics model that adaptively models time series patterns from multi-domain data and unifies multiple tasks in pre-training. Conceptually, TimeSeek is guided by selective information sharing under domain and task heterogeneity. From the perspective of multi-domain data, we propose a Multi-Domain Feature Extractor that adaptively captures temporal dependencies and channel correlations based on domain-specific characteristics, including progressive multi-scale modeling and adaptive slot channel modeling. From the perspective of the diversity of tasks, we propose multi-task collaborative training, which leverages task specificity and task commonality through task customization and cross-task training, effectively unifying multiple tasks in pre-training and better adapting to diverse downstream scenarios. After pre-training on large-scale time series data, TimeSeek achieves state-of-the-art performance in forecasting, anomaly detection, and classification tasks across both few-shot learning and zero-shot situations, together with favorable inference efficiency.

#03Nov 10, 2026

cs.AI

Contrastive Discovery: Open-Ended Scientific Discovery over Competing Explanations

Ziang Liu, James J. Kim, Yijia Dai and 1 more

LLM agents are increasingly used for open-ended, data-driven scientific discovery, yet most of them evaluate hypotheses pointwise, testing an empirical claim $h$ only against its complement $\neg h$. When evidence rejects $h$, the agent learns that one explanation is unlikely but not which alternative the evidence supports. To recover that alternative, we introduce Contrastive Discovery, which replaces the single hypothesis with a contrast set, a scientific question paired with mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive competing explanations. Each experiment is scored by how its evidence redistributes belief across the set, and the question is resolved when belief concentrates on one explanation. Because contrast sets change only the unit an agent proposes and scores, an existing agent can use them to re-evaluate evidence it has already collected or to guide its search. Across six domains, $89\%$ of the pointwise candidates with the largest belief shifts are rejections. On the same evidence, contrast sets resolve $73\%$ of these candidates to a specific alternative. When contrast sets guide search, the agent resolves $67\%$ more questions than pointwise surprisal under the same experiment budget. In a blinded study, $38$ human experts chose the same explanation on $78\%$ of resolved questions and on $82\%$ of questions where the pointwise agent rejected its hypothesis and stopped. Together, these results support explicit competing explanations as a way for discovery agents to resolve more scientific questions from the same evidence and validation budget.

#04Nov 10, 2026

cs.CL

Mechanistic Interpretability Needs a Logic of Inference

Zhimin Hu, Chen Jiang, Hanbo Xie and 2 more

Neural networks are increasingly studied not merely as predictive systems, but as complex systems whose internal computations are themselves objects of scientific inquiry. Recent progress in mechanistic interpretability (MI) has made it possible to identify neurons, features, circuits, population structures, and dynamical patterns associated with model behavior. As these tools improve, attention is shifting from what can be observed inside a model to how those observations support mechanistic explanations. We examine the parallel efforts of neuroscience and MI to address this question and identify recurring inferential bottlenecks when inferring mechanisms from complex neural systems. We propose five principles and organize them into a recursive logic for a more rigorous procedure of mechanistic inference. These principles provide a framework that supports scientific discovery in two senses: it helps turn local interpretability findings into cumulative knowledge of mechanisms within models, and it makes those mechanisms sufficiently precise to generate testable hypotheses about domains beyond the models. Evidence beyond MI is ultimately required to establish what model mechanisms reveal about the world.

#05Nov 10, 2026

math.ST

Nonparametric Maximum Likelihood Estimation for Mixtures of Logistic Regressions

Muheng Li, Peize Zhang, Xin Bing

Mixtures of logistic regressions provide a flexible framework for modeling binary responses, extending standard logistic regression to accommodate unobserved heterogeneity while retaining an interpretable regression structure. In this paper, we study such models with an unspecified mixing distribution. We analyze a sieve nonparametric maximum likelihood estimator (NPMLE) and derive nonasymptotic bounds on the estimation error of the resulting mixture regression function under both fixed and random designs. Our results reveal an explicit tradeoff between statistical estimation error and the approximation error induced by the sieve radius, from which we derive convergence rates under several tail conditions on the mixing distribution. For computation, we propose a finite-particle algorithm that approximates the sieve NPMLE by optimizing the locations and weights of a finitely supported mixing distribution. The method offers numerical advantages over existing algorithms and comes with rigorous convergence guarantees. For any fixed dataset, we establish global convergence of the likelihood to the restricted NPMLE value when the number of particles exceeds a finite threshold. When the true mixing distribution is finitely supported, we further establish uniform global convergence guarantees and derive error bounds that separate algorithmic and statistical errors. Our analysis also yields a denoising bound for the mixing distribution and an identifiability result that complements existing results in the literature.