LUMOS: Democratizing SciML Workflows with L0-Regularized Learning for Unified Feature and Parameter Adaptation

Black-box machine learning models increasingly deliver strong predictions, but extracting useful information from them, such as a set of important features, remains challenging. Existing model-agnostic methods primarily estimate feature importance or conduct inference on it rather than directly selecting features, whereas many feature selection methods are model-specific or rely on the model-X assumption. We introduce LOCO-guided Adaptive Minipatch Sampling (LAMPS), a model-agnostic ensemble framework that uses any black-box regression algorithm as its base learner to select features important for predicting the response. The base learner need only produce predictions and need not perform feature selection itself. LAMPS operates within a minipatch ensemble framework that subsamples both observations and features, allowing leave-one-covariate-out (LOCO) feature importance scores to be easily computed. It adaptively concentrates minipatch sampling on features with high LOCO scores while maintaining exploration. The resulting sampling probabilities rapidly separate signal from noise features after a few iterations, enabling selection through simple thresholding. We establish that LAMPS achieves exact feature selection in high-dimensional settings, provided that the base predictive models are sufficiently well trained on average. Extensive experiments on synthetic and real data show that LAMPS outperforms state-of-the-art feature selection methods, with particularly strong performance in the presence of correlated features.

Neural networks trained under different hyperparameter settings can fall into distinct training "regimes," with consistent behavior within regimes and qualitative differences across regimes. In this paper, we study such multi-regime behavior in scientific machine learning (SciML) models through a regime-aware diagnostic framework that jointly analyzes performance, training dynamics, and loss-landscape geometry. We identify three key findings: (i) a consistent three-regime structure emerges across many standard SciML models, different constraint enforcements, and various optimizer designs; (ii) optimization effectiveness is regime-specific, with no single method performing well across all regimes; and (iii) SciML models can exhibit fine-grained failure modes that can challenge conventional interpretations of standard loss-landscape metrics. Our results provide an approach to establish a unified, task-oblivious perspective on failure modes in SciML and to inform regime-aware guidance for improving robustness. We validate these findings across widely-used SciML models, including physics-informed neural networks, neural operators, and neural ordinary differential equations, on benchmarks spanning representative ordinary and partial differential equations.

While large language models (LLMs) show promise in scientific discovery, existing research focuses on inference or feedback-driven training, leaving the direct modeling of the generative reasoning process, $P(\text{hypothesis}|\text{background})$ ($P(h|b)$), unexplored. We demonstrate that directly training $P(h|b)$ is mathematically intractable due to the combinatorial complexity ($O(N^k)$) inherent in retrieving and composing inspirations from a vast knowledge base. To break this barrier, we introduce MOOSE-Star, a unified framework that enables tractable and scalable training of $P(h|b)$, while supporting more scalable inference. In the best case, MOOSE-Star reduces complexity from exponential to logarithmic ($O(\log N)$) by (1) training on decomposed subtasks derived from the probabilistic equation of discovery, (2) employing motivation-guided hierarchical search to enable logarithmic retrieval and prune irrelevant subspaces, and (3) utilizing bounded composition for robustness against retrieval noise. To facilitate this, we release TOMATO-Star, a dataset of 108,717 decomposed papers (38,400 GPU hours) for training. Empirically, MOOSE-Star scales continuously with training data and inference budget, whereas direct brute-force sampling hits a complexity wall.