Beyond the Stitching Assumption: A Unified Framework for Multimodal Synthetic Data Evaluation via Semantic Quantization
Organizations: Santa Clara University Santa Clara, USA · eBay Inc. San Jose, USA
Abstract
Multimodal synthetic datasets combine structured attributes with free text, but are often evaluated separately. Such metrics can remain high after tabular--text pairings are disrupted. We present a projection-based evaluator for tabular--text synthetic data. A fixed sentence encoder maps text to embeddings, -means converts them to cluster states, and tabular variables are represented as categorical or quantile-binned states. Real and synthetic contingency tables are compared using Jensen--Shannon divergence (JSD), normalized mutual information (NMI), conditional JSD (cJSD), and joint-state entropy. We also report text-to-attribute (T2A) utility and a holdout-calibrated proximity flag rate (PFR) as a representation-level diagnostic. A text-permutation control preserves both marginal distributions while disrupting their pairing. Experiments on Amazon Reviews, Kiva Loans, and the Employment Scam Aegean Dataset show that modality-specific scores remain high under this control. The projection diagnostics detect disruption when real projected dependence exceeds a permutation baseline, but are less informative for weak or sparse projections. Some conditioned LLM baselines also exhibit stronger measured dependence than the corresponding real-data projections. These results support explicit cross-modal evaluation with permutation baselines and coverage reporting.
Figures & tables
| Dataset | Method | Tabular marginal | BERTScore F1 | Embedding cosine |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amazon | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | |
| 1.000 | 0.840 | – | ||
| 0.510 | 0.844 | – | ||
| 0.510 | 0.852 | – | ||
| 0.635 | 0.846 | – | ||
| TabSyn-SBERT | 0.794 | – | 0.441 |
| Method | Projected JSD |
|---|---|
| 0.0000 | |
| 0.1017 | |
| 0.5778 | |
| 0.7369 | |
| 0.5865 | |
| TabSyn-SBERT | 0.3219 |
| Dataset | Method | Proj. JSD | NMI ratio / | cJSD | T2A | PFR 1% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kiva | 0.000 | 1.00 / 0.000 | 0.000 | – | 1.000 | – | |
| 0.698 | 0.016 / 0.600 | 0.687 | 0.076 | 1.432 | 0.186 | ||
| 0.844 | 0.075 / 0.565 | 0.773 | 0.062 | 1.601 | 0.000 | ||
| TabSyn-SBERT | 0.727 | 0.791 / 0.128 | 0.363 † | 0.427 | 1.093 | 0.000 | |
| 0.602 | 0.948 / 0.032 | 0.448 ‡ | 0.345 | 1.120 | 0.010 | ||
| 0.729 | 1.100 / -0.061 | 0.623 | 0.331 | 0.957 | 0.000 |
| Method | Pos. F1 | Balanced Acc. | AUROC | AUPRC | MCC | Min. Recall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Majority | 0.000 | 0.500 | – | – | – | 0.000 |
| 0.372 | 0.604 | 0.604 | 0.286 | 0.166 | 0.741 | |
| 0.343 | 0.598 | 0.622 | 0.401 | 0.239 | 0.277 | |
| 0.341 | 0.599 | 0.611 | 0.314 | 0.260 | 0.259 | |
| TabSyn-SBERT | 0.555 | 0.760 | 0.845 | 0.679 | 0.439 | 0.741 |
| 0.215 | 0.462 | 0.463 | 0.185 | -0.061 | 0.321 |
| Dataset | Max learned PFR | Tilted PFR | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amazon | 1.138 | 0.000 | 0.553 | 0.643 | 0.000 / 0.014 / 0.032 | 0.388 / 0.490 / 0.508 |
| Kiva | 1.315 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.010 / 0.010 / 0.010 | 0.186 / 0.186 / 0.186 |
| Fake Jobs | 1.165 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 / 0.000 / 0.000 | 0.580 / 0.580 / 0.580 |
| Check | Setting | Main finding |
|---|---|---|
| -sensitivity | Fake Jobs remains stable, with tilted-to-TabSyn-SBERT JSD ratios from 2.54 to 1.49. Amazon remains weak because rating–text dependence is small. Kiva is sparse under the primary sector projection, with occupied-cell ratios 20–51% and minimum cell count 1. | |
| -sensitivity | Raw DCR changes with , but PFR-based flagging pattern is unchanged across this 16-fold range: learned baselines remain unflagged or nearly unflagged, while remains flagged. | |
| XOR/parity stress test | , ; shuffles while preserving the tabular marginal | Each pair is marginally independent, so the mean pairwise JSD remains near zero in the finite-sample evaluation (0.0075). Shuffling destroys the parity support constraint, and the targeted 3-way projection detects the violation with empirical JSD 0.5542. This value is a finite-sample diagnostic statistic rather than the closed-form JSD of an ideal uniform parity distribution. |
Synthetic Data Evaluation
Synthetic data evaluation measures whether generated examples preserve the properties needed for a stated use, including fidelity, privacy, and utility.
See all 235 papers