Comparison of generalised additive models and neural networks in applications: A systematic review

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.24601v1
• Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2025 16:28:42 GMT
• Title: Comparison of generalised additive models and neural networks in applications: A systematic review
• Authors: Jessica Doohan, Lucas Kook, Kevin Burke,
• Abstract summary: Generalised Additive Models (GAMs) and neural networks are state-of-the-art statistical models that interpretability retainability.<n>We conduct a systematic review of papers that performed empirical comparisons of GAMs and neural networks.<n>Across datasets, no consistent evidence of superiority was found for either GAMs or neural networks.<n>This review highlights that GAMs and neural networks should be viewed as complementary competitors.
• Score: 1.1775939485654978
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Neural networks have become a popular tool in predictive modelling, more commonly associated with machine learning and artificial intelligence than with statistics. Generalised Additive Models (GAMs) are flexible non-linear statistical models that retain interpretability. Both are state-of-the-art in their own right, with their respective advantages and disadvantages. This paper analyses how these two model classes have performed on real-world tabular data. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review of papers that performed empirical comparisons of GAMs and neural networks. Eligible papers were identified, yielding 143 papers, with 430 datasets. Key attributes at both paper and dataset levels were extracted and reported. Beyond summarising comparisons, we analyse reported performance metrics using mixed-effects modelling to investigate potential characteristics that can explain and quantify observed differences, including application area, study year, sample size, number of predictors, and neural network complexity. Across datasets, no consistent evidence of superiority was found for either GAMs or neural networks when considering the most frequently reported metrics (RMSE, $R^2$, and AUC). Neural networks tended to outperform in larger datasets and in those with more predictors, but this advantage narrowed over time. Conversely, GAMs remained competitive, particularly in smaller data settings, while retaining interpretability. Reporting of dataset characteristics and neural network complexity was incomplete in much of the literature, limiting transparency and reproducibility. This review highlights that GAMs and neural networks should be viewed as complementary approaches rather than competitors. For many tabular applications, the performance trade-off is modest, and interpretability may favour GAMs.

Related papers

• A Comparative Analysis of Interpretable Machine Learning Methods [0.13854111346209866]
  In recent years, Machine Learning has seen widespread adoption across a broad range of sectors, including high-stakes domains such as healthcare, finance, and law.<n>Growing reliance has raised increasing concerns regarding model interpretability and accountability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-01T18:39:05Z)
• Comparing Methods for Bias Mitigation in Graph Neural Networks [5.256237513030105]
  This paper examines the critical role of Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) in data preparation for generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) systems.<n>We present a comparative analysis of three distinct methods for bias mitigation: data sparsification, feature modification, and synthetic data augmentation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-28T16:18:48Z)
• Improving Network Interpretability via Explanation Consistency Evaluation [56.14036428778861]
  We propose a framework that acquires more explainable activation heatmaps and simultaneously increase the model performance. Specifically, our framework introduces a new metric, i.e., explanation consistency, to reweight the training samples adaptively in model learning. Our framework then promotes the model learning by paying closer attention to those training samples with a high difference in explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T17:20:08Z)
• Joint Edge-Model Sparse Learning is Provably Efficient for Graph Neural Networks [89.28881869440433]
  This paper provides the first theoretical characterization of joint edge-model sparse learning for graph neural networks (GNNs) It proves analytically that both sampling important nodes and pruning neurons with the lowest-magnitude can reduce the sample complexity and improve convergence without compromising the test accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-06T16:54:20Z)
• Homophily modulates double descent generalization in graph convolution networks [33.703222768801574]
  We show how risk is shaped by the interplay between the graph noise, feature noise, and the number of training labels. We use our analytic insights to improve performance of state-of-the-art graph convolution networks on heterophilic datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-26T09:57:09Z)
• Batch-Ensemble Stochastic Neural Networks for Out-of-Distribution Detection [55.028065567756066]
  Out-of-distribution (OOD) detection has recently received much attention from the machine learning community due to its importance in deploying machine learning models in real-world applications. In this paper we propose an uncertainty quantification approach by modelling the distribution of features. We incorporate an efficient ensemble mechanism, namely batch-ensemble, to construct the batch-ensemble neural networks (BE-SNNs) and overcome the feature collapse problem. We show that BE-SNNs yield superior performance on several OOD benchmarks, such as the Two-Moons dataset, the FashionMNIST vs MNIST dataset, FashionM
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-26T16:00:22Z)
• On Generalisability of Machine Learning-based Network Intrusion Detection Systems [0.0]
  In this paper, we evaluate seven supervised and unsupervised learning models on four benchmark NIDS datasets. Our investigation indicates that none of the considered models is able to generalise over all studied datasets. Our investigation also indicates that overall, unsupervised learning methods generalise better than supervised learning models in our considered scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-09T08:26:48Z)
• Differentiable Reasoning over Long Stories -- Assessing Systematic Generalisation in Neural Models [12.479512369785082]
  We consider two classes of neural models: "E-GNN", the graph-based models that can process graph-structured data and consider the edge attributes simultaneously; and "L-Graph", the sequence-based models which can process linearized version of the graphs. We found that the modified recurrent neural network yield surprisingly accurate results across every systematic generalisation tasks which outperform the graph neural network.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-20T18:34:42Z)
• Comparing Test Sets with Item Response Theory [53.755064720563]
  We evaluate 29 datasets using predictions from 18 pretrained Transformer models on individual test examples. We find that Quoref, HellaSwag, and MC-TACO are best suited for distinguishing among state-of-the-art models. We also observe span selection task format, which is used for QA datasets like QAMR or SQuAD2.0, is effective in differentiating between strong and weak models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-01T22:33:53Z)
• Anomaly Detection on Attributed Networks via Contrastive Self-Supervised Learning [50.24174211654775]
  We present a novel contrastive self-supervised learning framework for anomaly detection on attributed networks. Our framework fully exploits the local information from network data by sampling a novel type of contrastive instance pair. A graph neural network-based contrastive learning model is proposed to learn informative embedding from high-dimensional attributes and local structure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-27T03:17:20Z)
• Ensembles of Spiking Neural Networks [0.3007949058551534]
  This paper demonstrates how to construct ensembles of spiking neural networks producing state-of-the-art results. We achieve classification accuracies of 98.71%, 100.0%, and 99.09%, on the MNIST, NMNIST and DVS Gesture datasets respectively. We formalize spiking neural networks as GLM predictors, identifying a suitable representation for their target domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-15T17:45:18Z)
• Neural Additive Models: Interpretable Machine Learning with Neural Nets [77.66871378302774]
  Deep neural networks (DNNs) are powerful black-box predictors that have achieved impressive performance on a wide variety of tasks. We propose Neural Additive Models (NAMs) which combine some of the expressivity of DNNs with the inherent intelligibility of generalized additive models. NAMs learn a linear combination of neural networks that each attend to a single input feature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-29T01:28:32Z)

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.