The Benchmarking Epistemology: Construct Validity for Evaluating Machine Learning Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.23191v1
• Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 10:30:30 GMT
• Title: The Benchmarking Epistemology: Construct Validity for Evaluating Machine Learning Models
• Authors: Timo Freiesleben, Sebastian Zezulka,
• Abstract summary: We develop conditions of construct validity inspired by psychological measurement theory.<n>We examine these assumptions in practice through three case studies.<n>Our framework clarifies conditions under which benchmark scores can support diverse scientific claims.
• Score: 1.1315617886931963
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Predictive benchmarking, the evaluation of machine learning models based on predictive performance and competitive ranking, is a central epistemic practice in machine learning research and an increasingly prominent method for scientific inquiry. Yet, benchmark scores alone provide at best measurements of model performance relative to an evaluation dataset and a concrete learning problem. Drawing substantial scientific inferences from the results, say about theoretical tasks like image classification, requires additional assumptions about the theoretical structure of the learning problems, evaluation functions, and data distributions. We make these assumptions explicit by developing conditions of construct validity inspired by psychological measurement theory. We examine these assumptions in practice through three case studies, each exemplifying a typical intended inference: measuring engineering progress in computer vision with ImageNet; evaluating policy-relevant weather predictions with WeatherBench; and examining limitations of the predictability of life events with the Fragile Families Challenge. Our framework clarifies the conditions under which benchmark scores can support diverse scientific claims, bringing predictive benchmarking into perspective as an epistemological practice and a key site of conceptual and theoretical reasoning in machine learning.

Related papers

• From Black-box to Causal-box: Towards Building More Interpretable Models [57.23201263629627]
  We introduce the notion of causal interpretability, which formalizes when counterfactual queries can be evaluated from a specific class of models.<n>We derive a complete graphical criterion that determines whether a given model architecture supports a given counterfactual query.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-24T20:03:18Z)
• PRISM-Physics: Causal DAG-Based Process Evaluation for Physics Reasoning [57.868248683256574]
  PRISM-Physics is a process-level evaluation framework and benchmark for complex physics reasoning problems.<n> Solutions are represented as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) of formulas.<n>Results show that our evaluation framework is aligned with human experts' scoring.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-03T17:09:03Z)
• When Is Prior Knowledge Helpful? Exploring the Evaluation and Selection of Unsupervised Pretext Tasks from a Neuro-Symbolic Perspective [45.419765404078724]
  We extend the Nesy theory based on reliable knowledge to the scenario of unreliable knowledge.<n>We propose schemes to operationalize these theoretical metrics, and thereby develop a method that can predict the effectiveness of pretext tasks in advance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-10T11:23:36Z)
• Measurement to Meaning: A Validity-Centered Framework for AI Evaluation [12.55408229639344]
  We provide a structured approach for reasoning about the types of evaluative claims that can be made given the available evidence.<n>Our framework is well-suited for the contemporary paradigm in machine learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-13T20:36:22Z)
• The Foundations of Tokenization: Statistical and Computational Concerns [51.370165245628975]
  Tokenization is a critical step in the NLP pipeline.<n>Despite its recognized importance as a standard representation method in NLP, the theoretical underpinnings of tokenization are not yet fully understood.<n>The present paper contributes to addressing this theoretical gap by proposing a unified formal framework for representing and analyzing tokenizer models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T11:12:28Z)
• Advancing Counterfactual Inference through Nonlinear Quantile Regression [77.28323341329461]
  We propose a framework for efficient and effective counterfactual inference implemented with neural networks. The proposed approach enhances the capacity to generalize estimated counterfactual outcomes to unseen data. Empirical results conducted on multiple datasets offer compelling support for our theoretical assertions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-09T08:30:51Z)
• Evaluation Gaps in Machine Learning Practice [13.963766987258161]
  In practice, evaluations of machine learning models frequently focus on a narrow range of decontextualized predictive behaviours. We examine the evaluation gaps between the idealized breadth of evaluation concerns and the observed narrow focus of actual evaluations. By studying these properties, we demonstrate the machine learning discipline's implicit assumption of a range of commitments which have normative impacts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-11T04:00:44Z)
• Active Inference in Robotics and Artificial Agents: Survey and Challenges [51.29077770446286]
  We review the state-of-the-art theory and implementations of active inference for state-estimation, control, planning and learning. We showcase relevant experiments that illustrate its potential in terms of adaptation, generalization and robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-03T12:10:26Z)
• A practical introduction to the Rational Speech Act modeling framework [2.1485350418225244]
  Recent advances in computational cognitive science paved the way for significant progress in formal, implementable models of pragmatics. This paper provides a practical introduction to and critical assessment of the Bayesian Rational Speech Act modeling framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-20T16:08:04Z)
• Double Robust Representation Learning for Counterfactual Prediction [68.78210173955001]
  We propose a novel scalable method to learn double-robust representations for counterfactual predictions. We make robust and efficient counterfactual predictions for both individual and average treatment effects. The algorithm shows competitive performance with the state-of-the-art on real world and synthetic data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-15T16:39:26Z)

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.