Tabular foundation models (TFMs) achieve strong predictive performance by conditioning on labeled demonstrations provided in context, without any parameter update. Yet how individual demonstrations shape a given prediction remains poorly understood. This gap matters in practice: the context is often assembled from whatever labeled data is available, potentially leading to the inclusion of mislabeled, redundant, or low-quality examples that degrade performance. Standard data attribution methods do not transfer to the TFM setting: resampling-based approaches such as DemoShapley require a combinatorial number of forward passes, and gradient-based estimators such as influence functions require computing training point's effect on the model parameters, which in-context learning never updates. We introduce TICDA, a method that measures the influence of every demonstration in the context directly from linear surrogates trained on TFM latent embeddings, in a single forward pass and at negligible cost. We show that TICDA offers the best compromise against competitors across four tasks: detecting labeling errors, curating context to preserve predictive accuracy while lowering inference cost, producing attribution scores that transfer across TFMs, and supporting an acquisition strategy for efficient active learning.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: TICDA overview. TICDA (1) extracts TFM embeddings, (2) trains a linear surrogate on the classification task of interest, (3) estimates influence score based on the surrogate and (4) can be applied for label-error detection, context curation, cross-TFM transfer and active learning.
LOO
DemoShapley
IG
DETAIL
TICDA (ours)
TabDPT
Faith. ↑
—
0.91∗∗∗±0.07
0.20±0.35
−0.06±0.18
0.79±0.09
AUC ↑
0.90∗∗∗±0.08
0.88±0.10
0.60±0.20
0.47±0.13
0.88±0.08
TabICL
Faith. ↑
—
0.65±0.15
0.30±0.22
−0.11±0.22
0.67±0.21
AUC ↑
0.80±0.16
0.76±0.11
0.64±0.18
0.37±0.17
0.89∗∗∗±0.08
Table 1: Data attribution for in-context demonstrations on tabular foundation models. Results are aggregated over 38 datasets (mean ± std). Best results are bold , second best underlined ; stars compare the winner with the runner-up (two-sided paired t -test, ∗p<.10 , ∗∗p<.05 , ∗∗∗p<.01 ).
Figure 2: Average computation time per method.
Configuration
Metrics
Influence
Dimension
Faith. ↑
AUC ↑
Time (s) ↓
query
20%
0.32±0.16
0.85±0.10
4.90±1.30
query
full
0.33±0.16
0.86±0.10
5.09±1.31
self
20%
0.67±0.21
0.89±0.08
3.51±0.68
self
full
0.67±0.21
0.89±0.08
3.71±0.69
Table 2: Ablation study on TabICL (38 datasets, 20% label corruption, mean ± std).
Figure 3: Curation: aggregated balanced accuracy evolution on TabDPT and TabICL under different levels of demonstration corruption. Each method ranks in-context demonstrations by its attribution scores, and the lowest-scored demonstrations are removed.
Demonstrations removed
Target
Source
0%
10%
20%
50%
TabPFN-3
Random
59.0±14.9
58.7±14.6
58.3±14.4
56.6±14.1
TabICLv2
59.0±14.9
63.5±15.8
65.0±15.8
64.4±15.4
TabDPT
59.0±14.9
62.6±15.7
64.0±15.7
63.4±15.2
TabPFN-3.5
Random
60.4±15.5
60.1±15.2
59.8±15.1
57.9±14.3
TabICLv2
60.4±15.5
64.1±15.9
64.5±15.9
64.6±15.5
Table 3: TICDA TDA Transfer for context curation between source and target models. Balanced accuracy (mean ± std, aggregated over all datasets) is reported at several levels of removal.
Figure 7
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Demonstrations in the context
Remaining demonstrations
Queries
512
2.90 ± 0.60
2.93 ± 0.62
1,024
1.73 ± 0.61
1.71 ± 0.61
2,048
0.89 ± 0.24
0.88 ± 0.25
4,096
0.48 ± 0.14
0.48 ± 0.15
8,192
0.24 ± 0.07
0.24 ± 0.08
Appendix
Table 5: Relative change ρij of the TabICL representations when one demonstration is removed (Equation 17 ), in percent of the norm of the representation, for contexts of increasing size. For each dataset, we take the median of ρij over all pairs of a removed demonstration i and a row j , and we report the mean ± standard deviation of this median over the four datasets. A value of zero would mean that the representations do not change.
Figure 5: Relative change ρij of the TabICL representations when one demonstration is removed, against the number n of demonstrations in the context, on logarithmic axes. The markers show the mean over the four datasets of the per-dataset median, as in Table 5 , and the band one standard deviation for the remaining demonstrations. The change of the queries coincides with that of the remaining demonstrations, and both follow the dotted line, which decreases as 1/n .
Tabular foundation models perform in-context learning (ICL) by conditioning predictions on labeled training examples provided as context. Unlike traditional models that separate training from inference, these models must process all training examples in every forward pass, making each prediction expensive. Restricting the number of training examples reduces this cost but substantially degrades performance. Instead of discarding context, we propose activation alignment, a method that leverages the full context to teach a model how to behave when seeing only a subset. This is achieved by training a lightweight linear transformation on synthetic unlabeled data to map the intermediate activations of a data-constrained "student" (using partial context) toward those of a full-context "teacher" (using all data). Training the aligner requires no GPU and converges in seconds to minutes on commodity hardware. We evaluate on 38 classification datasets from the TabArena benchmark using the leading two tabular foundation models, TabPFN-3 and TabFM. Across all context budgets, the aligned student yields broad, statistically significant improvements over the unaligned baseline for both models. In low-data regimes, alignment recovers nearly half of the teacher's predictive advantage. The method provides a practical, low-overhead approach to achieving the inference speed of compact contexts while closing a significant fraction of the performance gap to the full-context teacher.
Training Data Attribution (TDA) seeks to trace a model's predictions back to its training data. The gold standard for TDA relies on causal interventions, observing how a model changes when data is added or removed, but repeated retraining is computationally challenging for Large Language Models (LLMs). Consequently, most approaches approximate this effect in the parameter space using gradients. However, tracking gradients across billions of parameters is not only prohibitively expensive but relies on local approximations. In this work, we propose a shift: rather than estimating parameter changes, we model the functional effect of training data in the activation space. We introduce STRIDE (Steering-based Training Data Influence Decomposition), a framework that formulates TDA as a sparse recovery problem in the spirit of compressive sensing. STRIDE learns lightweight "steering operators" that mimic the behavioral shift caused by training on data subsets. By measuring how these operators perturb test predictions, we recover individual training example influences via sparse linear decomposition. STRIDE achieves state-of-the-art for LLM pre-training attribution while being an order of magnitude (13×) faster than previous art. We further validate its practical utility through downstream applications including data selection, data contamination, and qualitative analysis.
Rishit Dagli, Abir Harrasse, Luke Zhang +4
Jinesis AI Lab, University of Toronto & Vector Institute · Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems, Tübingen, Germany · Thoughtworks +3
Recent progress in tabular foundation models suggests that training on synthetic tasks can substantially improve in-context learning capabilities, with overall performance largely depending on how well models can infer task-specific predictive relationships from the available context during inference. In this paper, we introduce TAFFY, a tabular foundation model with an In-Context Diversity Prior and a Task-Conditioned Looped Transformer that strengthen this ability. Specifically, to construct each synthetic pretraining context, the In-Context Diversity Prior samples from multiple related environments derived via controlled interventions and distribution shifts on a shared causal process. This in-context diversity encourages the model to learn a more comprehensive and task-specific representation. Moreover, the Task-Conditioned Looped Transformer iteratively and selectively applies a shared group of Transformer blocks to refine contextual representations, with a task-conditioned gate modulating the final hidden-state update. This enables task-adaptive iterative refinement. Together, these components encourage the model to identify predictive relationships from contextual contrasts during pretraining and dynamically modulate context integration for each task. Across six classification and five regression benchmark datasets, TAFFY attains the lowest average rank.
Zijian Li, Xiangchen Song, Gongxu Luo +7
Carnegie Mellon University · Mohamed bin Zayed University of Artificial Intelligence · Guangdong University of Technology +1