Yury Gorishniy

LG
h-index7
7papers
1,918citations
Novelty48%
AI Score45

7 Papers

LGMar 10, 2022
On Embeddings for Numerical Features in Tabular Deep Learning

Yury Gorishniy, Ivan Rubachev, Artem Babenko

Recently, Transformer-like deep architectures have shown strong performance on tabular data problems. Unlike traditional models, e.g., MLP, these architectures map scalar values of numerical features to high-dimensional embeddings before mixing them in the main backbone. In this work, we argue that embeddings for numerical features are an underexplored degree of freedom in tabular DL, which allows constructing more powerful DL models and competing with GBDT on some traditionally GBDT-friendly benchmarks. We start by describing two conceptually different approaches to building embedding modules: the first one is based on a piecewise linear encoding of scalar values, and the second one utilizes periodic activations. Then, we empirically demonstrate that these two approaches can lead to significant performance boosts compared to the embeddings based on conventional blocks such as linear layers and ReLU activations. Importantly, we also show that embedding numerical features is beneficial for many backbones, not only for Transformers. Specifically, after proper embeddings, simple MLP-like models can perform on par with the attention-based architectures. Overall, we highlight embeddings for numerical features as an important design aspect with good potential for further improvements in tabular DL.

LGJul 7, 2022
Revisiting Pretraining Objectives for Tabular Deep Learning

Ivan Rubachev, Artem Alekberov, Yury Gorishniy et al.

Recent deep learning models for tabular data currently compete with the traditional ML models based on decision trees (GBDT). Unlike GBDT, deep models can additionally benefit from pretraining, which is a workhorse of DL for vision and NLP. For tabular problems, several pretraining methods were proposed, but it is not entirely clear if pretraining provides consistent noticeable improvements and what method should be used, since the methods are often not compared to each other or comparison is limited to the simplest MLP architectures. In this work, we aim to identify the best practices to pretrain tabular DL models that can be universally applied to different datasets and architectures. Among our findings, we show that using the object target labels during the pretraining stage is beneficial for the downstream performance and advocate several target-aware pretraining objectives. Overall, our experiments demonstrate that properly performed pretraining significantly increases the performance of tabular DL models, which often leads to their superiority over GBDTs.

LGJul 26, 2023
TabR: Tabular Deep Learning Meets Nearest Neighbors in 2023

Yury Gorishniy, Ivan Rubachev, Nikolay Kartashev et al.

Deep learning (DL) models for tabular data problems (e.g. classification, regression) are currently receiving increasingly more attention from researchers. However, despite the recent efforts, the non-DL algorithms based on gradient-boosted decision trees (GBDT) remain a strong go-to solution for these problems. One of the research directions aimed at improving the position of tabular DL involves designing so-called retrieval-augmented models. For a target object, such models retrieve other objects (e.g. the nearest neighbors) from the available training data and use their features and labels to make a better prediction. In this work, we present TabR -- essentially, a feed-forward network with a custom k-Nearest-Neighbors-like component in the middle. On a set of public benchmarks with datasets up to several million objects, TabR marks a big step forward for tabular DL: it demonstrates the best average performance among tabular DL models, becomes the new state-of-the-art on several datasets, and even outperforms GBDT models on the recently proposed "GBDT-friendly" benchmark (see Figure 1). Among the important findings and technical details powering TabR, the main ones lie in the attention-like mechanism that is responsible for retrieving the nearest neighbors and extracting valuable signal from them. In addition to the much higher performance, TabR is simple and significantly more efficient compared to prior retrieval-based tabular DL models.

73.9LGApr 17
Benchmarking Optimizers for MLPs in Tabular Deep Learning

Yury Gorishniy, Ivan Rubachev, Dmitrii Feoktistov et al.

MLP is a heavily used backbone in modern deep learning (DL) architectures for supervised learning on tabular data, and AdamW is the go-to optimizer used to train tabular DL models. Unlike architecture design, however, the choice of optimizer for tabular DL has not been examined systematically, despite new optimizers showing promise in other domains. To fill this gap, we benchmark 15 optimizers on 17 tabular datasets for training MLP-based models in the standard supervised learning setting under a shared experiment protocol. Our main finding is that the Muon optimizer consistently outperforms AdamW, and thus should be considered a strong and practical choice for practitioners and researchers, if the associated training efficiency overhead is affordable. Additionally, we find exponential moving average of model weights to be a simple yet effective technique that improves AdamW on vanilla MLPs, though its effect is less consistent across model variants.

LGOct 31, 2024
TabM: Advancing Tabular Deep Learning with Parameter-Efficient Ensembling

Yury Gorishniy, Akim Kotelnikov, Artem Babenko

Deep learning architectures for supervised learning on tabular data range from simple multilayer perceptrons (MLP) to sophisticated Transformers and retrieval-augmented methods. This study highlights a major, yet so far overlooked opportunity for designing substantially better MLP-based tabular architectures. Namely, our new model TabM relies on efficient ensembling, where one TabM efficiently imitates an ensemble of MLPs and produces multiple predictions per object. Compared to a traditional deep ensemble, in TabM, the underlying implicit MLPs are trained simultaneously, and (by default) share most of their parameters, which results in significantly better performance and efficiency. Using TabM as a new baseline, we perform a large-scale evaluation of tabular DL architectures on public benchmarks in terms of both task performance and efficiency, which renders the landscape of tabular DL in a new light. Generally, we show that MLPs, including TabM, form a line of stronger and more practical models compared to attention- and retrieval-based architectures. In particular, we find that TabM demonstrates the best performance among tabular DL models. Then, we conduct an empirical analysis on the ensemble-like nature of TabM. We observe that the multiple predictions of TabM are weak individually, but powerful collectively. Overall, our work brings an impactful technique to tabular DL and advances the performance-efficiency trade-off with TabM -- a simple and powerful baseline for researchers and practitioners.

LGJun 27, 2024
TabReD: Analyzing Pitfalls and Filling the Gaps in Tabular Deep Learning Benchmarks

Ivan Rubachev, Nikolay Kartashev, Yury Gorishniy et al.

Advances in machine learning research drive progress in real-world applications. To ensure this progress, it is important to understand the potential pitfalls on the way from a novel method's success on academic benchmarks to its practical deployment. In this work, we analyze existing tabular benchmarks and find two common characteristics of tabular data in typical industrial applications that are underrepresented in the datasets usually used for evaluation in the literature. First, in real-world deployment scenarios, distribution of data often changes over time. To account for this distribution drift, time-based train/test splits should be used in evaluation. However, popular tabular datasets often lack timestamp metadata to enable such evaluation. Second, a considerable portion of datasets in production settings stem from extensive data acquisition and feature engineering pipelines. This can have an impact on the absolute and relative number of predictive, uninformative, and correlated features compared to academic datasets. In this work, we aim to understand how recent research advances in tabular deep learning transfer to these underrepresented conditions. To this end, we introduce TabReD -- a collection of eight industry-grade tabular datasets. We reassess a large number of tabular ML models and techniques on TabReD. We demonstrate that evaluation on time-based data splits leads to different methods ranking, compared to evaluation on random splits, which are common in current benchmarks. Furthermore, simple MLP-like architectures and GBDT show the best results on the TabReD datasets, while other methods are less effective in the new setting.

LGJun 22, 2021
Revisiting Deep Learning Models for Tabular Data

Yury Gorishniy, Ivan Rubachev, Valentin Khrulkov et al.

The existing literature on deep learning for tabular data proposes a wide range of novel architectures and reports competitive results on various datasets. However, the proposed models are usually not properly compared to each other and existing works often use different benchmarks and experiment protocols. As a result, it is unclear for both researchers and practitioners what models perform best. Additionally, the field still lacks effective baselines, that is, the easy-to-use models that provide competitive performance across different problems. In this work, we perform an overview of the main families of DL architectures for tabular data and raise the bar of baselines in tabular DL by identifying two simple and powerful deep architectures. The first one is a ResNet-like architecture which turns out to be a strong baseline that is often missing in prior works. The second model is our simple adaptation of the Transformer architecture for tabular data, which outperforms other solutions on most tasks. Both models are compared to many existing architectures on a diverse set of tasks under the same training and tuning protocols. We also compare the best DL models with Gradient Boosted Decision Trees and conclude that there is still no universally superior solution.