Sanity Checks for Agentic Data Science

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.11003v1
• Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2026 05:11:28 GMT
• Title: Sanity Checks for Agentic Data Science
• Abstract summary: Agentic data science (ADS) pipelines have grown rapidly in both capability and adoption.<n>These systems can reach falsely optimistic conclusions that are difficult for users to detect.<n>We propose a pair of lightweight sanity checks grounded in the Predictability-Computability-Stability framework.
• Score: 43.38296659030703
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Agentic data science (ADS) pipelines have grown rapidly in both capability and adoption, with systems such as OpenAI Codex now able to directly analyze datasets and produce answers to statistical questions. However, these systems can reach falsely optimistic conclusions that are difficult for users to detect. To address this, we propose a pair of lightweight sanity checks grounded in the Predictability-Computability-Stability (PCS) framework for veridical data science. These checks use reasonable perturbations to screen whether an agent can reliably distinguish signal from noise, acting as a falsifiability constraint that can expose affirmative conclusions as unsupported. Together, the two checks characterize the trustworthiness of an ADS output, e.g. whether it has found stable signal, is responding to noise, or is sensitive to incidental aspects of the input. We validate the approach on synthetic data with controlled signal-to-noise ratios, confirming that the sanity checks track ground-truth signal strength. We then demonstrate the checks on 11 real-world datasets using OpenAI Codex, characterizing the trustworthiness of each conclusion and finding that in 6 of the datasets an affirmative conclusion is not well-supported, even though a single ADS run may support one. We further analyze failure modes of ADS systems and find that ADS self-reported confidence is poorly calibrated to the empirical stability of its conclusions.

Related papers

• Auditing Data Provenance in LLM Fine-tuning via Intrinsic Distributional Fingerprints [12.090394120714402]
  We propose textitDistribution Provenance Audit (DPA), a post-hoc framework for auditing data IP infringement in Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>DPA is grounded in a critical insight: regardless of fine-tuning tactics to evade provenance, the practical necessity of maintaining utility constrains the model to preserve the fundamental intersection of semantic substance and lexical form.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-03T12:35:51Z)
• Conformal Changepoint Localization and Root Cause Analysis with Corrupted Observations [55.76952683833966]
  This paper proposes weighted CONCH (W-CONCH) and weighted CROC (W-CROC) to reduce confidence set size when data may be corrupted.<n>Experiments on image-based and real-world changepoint and root-cause benchmarks show that uncertainty-based weighting substantially reduces confidence set size.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-29T05:16:59Z)
• Phantoms and Disclosures: a Causal Framework for Auditing Synthetic Data [56.86147283213652]
  We present a customizable empirical auditing framework designed to detect and explain data disclosures.<n>Our framework introduces a mechanism to distinguish between "true disclosures"-where the system directly reproduces a user's information-and "phantom disclosures"-where the system incidentally generates a user's data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-15T16:54:02Z)
• Unsupervised Skill Discovery for Agentic Data Analysis [55.42853694128929]
  DataCOPE is an unsupervised verifier-guided skill discovery framework for data-analytic agents.<n>It iteratively coordinates a Data-Analytic Agent for trajectory generation, an Unsupervised Verifier for signal extraction, and a Skill Manager for contrastive skill distillation.<n>We evaluate DataCOPE on report-style analysis from Deep Data Research and reasoning-style analysis from DABStep.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-04T17:20:47Z)
• Trust, but Don't Verify: Epistemic Blind Spots in LLM Source Evaluation [0.0]
  We show that models possess the capability to detect fabricated statistics but do not recruit this capability during multi-source synthesis.<n>Specifically, source influence is governed by a methodology-register gate that responds to the distributional register of analytical text but not to numeric validity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-03T20:15:48Z)
• Avoiding Structural Failure Modes in Tabular Fair SSL: Online Primal-Dual Allocation under Confidence Gating [5.890873839907491]
  Semi-supervised learning (SSL) enables prediction with limited labels, but high-stakes applications (medical, credit, recidivism) require statistical fairness guarantees.<n>We propose Online Primal-Dual Allocation (OPDA), an online controller that schedules fairness and entropy-based stability penalties using violation, risk, and pseudo-label health signals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-15T01:43:32Z)
• Learning to Pay Attention: Unsupervised Modeling of Attentive and Inattentive Respondents in Survey Data [0.14323566945483493]
  Traditional safeguards, such as attention checks, are often costly, reactive, and inconsistent.<n>We propose a unified, label-free framework for inattentiveness detection using complementary unsupervised views.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T22:11:51Z)
• Decision-Aware Trust Signal Alignment for SOC Alert Triage [0.0]
  The present paper presents a decision-sensitive trust signal correspondence scheme of SOC alert triage.<n>The framework combines confidence that has been calibrated, lightweight uncertainty cues, and cost-sensitive decision thresholds into coherent decision-support layer.<n>We show that false negatives are greatly amplified by the presence of misaligned displays of confidence, whereas cost weighted loss decreases by orders of magnitude between models with decision aligned trust signals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-08T01:41:54Z)
• IPAD: Inverse Prompt for AI Detection -- A Robust and Explainable LLM-Generated Text Detector [11.112793289424886]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have attained human-level fluency in text generation, which complicates the distinction between human-written and LLM-generated texts.<n>Existing detectors exhibit poor robustness on out-of-distribution (OOD) data and attacked data, which is critical for real-world scenarios.<n>We propose IPAD (Inverse Prompt for AI Detection), a novel framework consisting of a Prompt that identifies predicted prompts that could have generated the input text, and two Distinguishers that examine the probability that the input texts align with the predicted prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T19:41:32Z)
• D2SP: Dynamic Dual-Stage Purification Framework for Dual Noise Mitigation in Vision-based Affective Recognition [32.74206402632733]
  Noise arises from low-quality captures that defy logical labeling, and instances that suffer from mislabeling due to annotation bias. We have crafted a two-stage framework aiming at textbfSeeking textbfCertain data textbfIn extensive textbfUncertain data (SCIU) This initiative aims to purge the DFER datasets of these uncertainties, thereby ensuring that only clean, verified data is employed in training processes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T09:25:02Z)
• DAGnosis: Localized Identification of Data Inconsistencies using Structures [73.39285449012255]
  Identification and appropriate handling of inconsistencies in data at deployment time is crucial to reliably use machine learning models. We use directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) to encode the training set's features probability distribution and independencies as a structure. Our method, called DAGnosis, leverages these structural interactions to bring valuable and insightful data-centric conclusions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-26T11:29:16Z)
• Conservative Prediction via Data-Driven Confidence Minimization [70.93946578046003]
  In safety-critical applications of machine learning, it is often desirable for a model to be conservative. We propose the Data-Driven Confidence Minimization framework, which minimizes confidence on an uncertainty dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-08T07:05:36Z)
• Auditing and Generating Synthetic Data with Controllable Trust Trade-offs [54.262044436203965]
  We introduce a holistic auditing framework that comprehensively evaluates synthetic datasets and AI models. It focuses on preventing bias and discrimination, ensures fidelity to the source data, assesses utility, robustness, and privacy preservation. We demonstrate the framework's effectiveness by auditing various generative models across diverse use cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-21T09:03:18Z)

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.