Do Tabular Foundation Models Know Physics? Contamination, Units, and the Deterministic Limit

September 02, 2026 ยท Grace Period ยท ๐Ÿ› NeurIPS 2026

โณ Grace Period
This paper is less than 90 days old. We give authors time to release their code before passing judgment.
Authors Wassim Tenachi, Yashar Hezaveh, Laurence Perreault Levasseur, Pierre-Luc Bacon arXiv ID 2609.02766 Category cs.LG: Machine Learning Cross-listed astro-ph.IM Citations 0 Venue NeurIPS 2026
Abstract
Tabular foundation models (TFMs) learn to fill in tables the way language models fill in text, and tables are arguably the format in which most physical measurement arrives. Did they learn any physics in the process? They are Bayesian by construction, so the question is what their prior contains. We probe it directly, evaluating four of them (TabPFN-3, TabICLv2, TabDPT and Real-TabPFN-2.5) against six baselines on datasets sampled from 316 physical equations, in and out of domain. TFMs dominate, out of the box and after tuning. But we show that their prior can represent neither a noiseless mechanism nor physical units, which is why they interpolate physics without yet being able to act as physical models.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Machine Learning