What's Wrong with Your Synthetic Tabular Data? Using Explainable AI to Evaluate Generative Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.20687v1
• Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 12:10:52 GMT
• Title: What's Wrong with Your Synthetic Tabular Data? Using Explainable AI to Evaluate Generative Models
• Authors: Jan Kapar, Niklas Koenen, Martin Jullum,
• Abstract summary: We apply explainable AI (XAI) techniques to a binary detection classifier trained to distinguish real from synthetic data.<n>While the classifier identifies distributional differences, XAI concepts, analyzed through methods like permutation feature importance, partial dependence plots, Shapley values, reveal why synthetic data are distinguishable.<n>This interpretability increases transparency in synthetic data evaluation and provides deeper insights beyond conventional metrics.
• Score: 1.024113475677323
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Evaluating synthetic tabular data is challenging, since they can differ from the real data in so many ways. There exist numerous metrics of synthetic data quality, ranging from statistical distances to predictive performance, often providing conflicting results. Moreover, they fail to explain or pinpoint the specific weaknesses in the synthetic data. To address this, we apply explainable AI (XAI) techniques to a binary detection classifier trained to distinguish real from synthetic data. While the classifier identifies distributional differences, XAI concepts such as feature importance and feature effects, analyzed through methods like permutation feature importance, partial dependence plots, Shapley values and counterfactual explanations, reveal why synthetic data are distinguishable, highlighting inconsistencies, unrealistic dependencies, or missing patterns. This interpretability increases transparency in synthetic data evaluation and provides deeper insights beyond conventional metrics, helping diagnose and improve synthetic data quality. We apply our approach to two tabular datasets and generative models, showing that it uncovers issues overlooked by standard evaluation techniques.

Related papers

• Scaling Laws of Synthetic Data for Language Models [132.67350443447611]
  We introduce SynthLLM, a scalable framework that transforms pre-training corpora into diverse, high-quality synthetic datasets.<n>Our approach achieves this by automatically extracting and recombining high-level concepts across multiple documents using a graph algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-25T11:07:12Z)
• Boosting Semi-Supervised Scene Text Recognition via Viewing and Summarizing [71.29488677105127]
  Existing scene text recognition (STR) methods struggle to recognize challenging texts, especially for artistic and severely distorted characters. We propose a contrastive learning-based STR framework by leveraging synthetic and real unlabeled data without any human cost. Our method achieves SOTA performance (94.7% and 70.9% average accuracy on common benchmarks and Union14M-Benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T15:24:47Z)
• Unveiling the Flaws: Exploring Imperfections in Synthetic Data and Mitigation Strategies for Large Language Models [89.88010750772413]
  Synthetic data has been proposed as a solution to address the issue of high-quality data scarcity in the training of large language models (LLMs) Our work delves into these specific flaws associated with question-answer (Q-A) pairs, a prevalent type of synthetic data, and presents a method based on unlearning techniques to mitigate these flaws. Our work has yielded key insights into the effective use of synthetic data, aiming to promote more robust and efficient LLM training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T08:38:59Z)
• Massively Annotated Datasets for Assessment of Synthetic and Real Data in Face Recognition [0.2775636978045794]
  We study the drift between the performance of models trained on real and synthetic datasets. We conduct studies on the differences between real and synthetic datasets on the attribute set. Interestingly enough, we have verified that while real samples suffice to explain the synthetic distribution, the opposite could not be further from being true.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-23T17:10:49Z)
• Reliability in Semantic Segmentation: Can We Use Synthetic Data? [69.28268603137546]
  We show for the first time how synthetic data can be specifically generated to assess comprehensively the real-world reliability of semantic segmentation models. This synthetic data is employed to evaluate the robustness of pretrained segmenters. We demonstrate how our approach can be utilized to enhance the calibration and OOD detection capabilities of segmenters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-14T18:56:07Z)
• The Real Deal Behind the Artificial Appeal: Inferential Utility of Tabular Synthetic Data [40.165159490379146]
  We show that the rate of false-positive findings (type 1 error) will be unacceptably high, even when the estimates are unbiased. Despite the use of a previously proposed correction factor, this problem persists for deep generative models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-13T02:04:41Z)
• Boosting Data Analytics With Synthetic Volume Expansion [3.568650932986342]
  This article explores the effectiveness of statistical methods on synthetic data and the privacy risks of synthetic data. A key finding within this framework is the generational effect, which reveals that the error rate of statistical methods on synthetic data decreases with the addition of more synthetic data but may eventually rise or stabilize.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-27T01:57:27Z)
• Reimagining Synthetic Tabular Data Generation through Data-Centric AI: A Comprehensive Benchmark [56.8042116967334]
  Synthetic data serves as an alternative in training machine learning models. ensuring that synthetic data mirrors the complex nuances of real-world data is a challenging task. This paper explores the potential of integrating data-centric AI techniques to guide the synthetic data generation process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-25T20:32:02Z)
• A Discrepancy Aware Framework for Robust Anomaly Detection [51.710249807397695]
  We present a Discrepancy Aware Framework (DAF), which demonstrates robust performance consistently with simple and cheap strategies. Our method leverages an appearance-agnostic cue to guide the decoder in identifying defects, thereby alleviating its reliance on synthetic appearance. Under the simple synthesis strategies, it outperforms existing methods by a large margin. Furthermore, it also achieves the state-of-the-art localization performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-11T15:21:40Z)
• Synthetic data, real errors: how (not) to publish and use synthetic data [86.65594304109567]
  We show how the generative process affects the downstream ML task. We introduce Deep Generative Ensemble (DGE) to approximate the posterior distribution over the generative process model parameters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-16T07:30:29Z)
• TabSynDex: A Universal Metric for Robust Evaluation of Synthetic Tabular Data [14.900342838726747]
  We propose a new universal metric, TabSynDex, for robust evaluation of synthetic data. Being a single score metric, TabSynDex can also be used to observe and evaluate the training of neural network based approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-12T04:08:11Z)
• Transitioning from Real to Synthetic data: Quantifying the bias in model [1.6134566438137665]
  This study aims to establish a trade-off between bias and fairness in the models trained using synthetic data. We demonstrate there exist a varying levels of bias impact on models trained using synthetic data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-10T06:57:14Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.