Synthetic Data Evaluation

Validating evaluation metrics for NLG typically relies on expensive and time-consuming human annotations, which predominantly exist only for English datasets. We propose LLM as a Meta-Judge, a scalable framework that utilizes LLMs to generate synthetic evaluation datasets via controlled semantic degradation of real data, replacing human judgment. We validate our approach using meta-correlation, measuring the alignment between metric rankings derived from synthetic data and those from standard human benchmarks. Experiments across Machine Translation, Question Answering, and Summarization demonstrate that synthetic validation serves as a reliable proxy for human judgment, achieving meta-correlations exceeding 0.9 in multilingual QA and proves to be a viable alternative where human judgments are unavailable or too expensive to obtain. Our code and data are publicly available at https://github.com/eiglerl/meta-judge.

Efficient luggage trolley management is critical for reducing congestion and ensuring asset availability in modern airports. Automated detection systems face two main challenges. First, strict security and privacy regulations limit large-scale data collection. Second, existing public datasets lack the diversity, scale, and annotation quality needed to handle dense, overlapping trolley arrangements typical of real-world operations. To address these limitations, we introduce a synthetic data generation pipeline based on a high-fidelity Digital Twin of Algiers International Airport using NVIDIA Omniverse. The pipeline produces richly annotated data with oriented bounding boxes, capturing complex trolley formations, including tightly nested chains. We evaluate YOLO-OBB using five training strategies: real-only, synthetic-only, linear probing, full fine-tuning, and mixed training. This allows us to assess how synthetic data can complement limited real-world annotations. Our results show that mixed training with synthetic data and only 40 percent of real annotations matches or exceeds the full real-data baseline, achieving 0.94 mAP@50 and 0.77 mAP@50-95, while reducing annotation effort by 25 to 35 percent. Multi-seed experiments confirm strong reproducibility with a standard deviation below 0.01 on mAP@50, demonstrating the practical effectiveness of synthetic data for automated trolley detection.

Evaluating time series attribution methods is difficult because real-world datasets rarely provide ground truth for which time points drive a prediction. A common workaround is to generate synthetic data where class-discriminating features are placed at known locations, but each study currently reimplements this from scratch. We introduce xaitimesynth, a Python package that provides reusable infrastructure for this evaluation approach. The package generates synthetic time series following an additive model where each sample is a sum of background signal and a localized, class-discriminating feature, with the feature window automatically tracked as a ground truth mask. A fluent data generation API and YAML configuration format allow flexible and reproducible dataset definitions for both univariate and multivariate time series. The package also provides standard localization metrics, including AUC-PR, AUC-ROC, Relevance Mass Accuracy, and Relevance Rank Accuracy. xaitimesynth is open source and available at https://github.com/gregorbaer/xaitimesynth.

Access to electronic health records (EHRs) for digital health research is often limited by privacy regulations and institutional barriers. Synthetic EHRs have been proposed as a way to enable safe and sovereign data sharing; however, existing methods may produce records that capture overall statistical properties of real data but present inconsistencies across clinical processes and observations. We developed an integrated pipeline to make synthetic patient trajectories clinically consistent through two synergistic steps: high-fidelity generation and scalable auditing. Using the MIMIC-IV database, we trained a knowledge-grounded generative model that represents nearly 32,000 distinct clinical events, including demographics, laboratory measurements, medications, procedures, and diagnoses, while enforcing structural integrity. To support clinical consistency at scale, we incorporated an automated auditing module leveraging large language models to filter out clinical inconsistencies (e.g., contraindicated medications) that escape probabilistic generation. We generated 18,071 synthetic patient records derived from a source cohort of 180,712 real patients. While synthetic clinical event probabilities demonstrated robust agreement (mean bias effectively 0.00) and high correlation (R2=0.99) with the real counterparts, review of a random sample of synthetic records (N=20) by three clinicians identified inconsistencies in 45-60% of them. Automated auditing reduced the difference between real and synthetic data (Cohen's effect size d between 0.59 and 1.60 before auditing, and between 0.18 and 0.67 after auditing). Downstream models trained on audited data matched or even exceeded real-data performance. We found no evidence of privacy risks, with membership inference performance indistinguishable from random guessing (F1-score=0.51).

The emergence of generative AI models has dramatically expanded the availability and use of synthetic data across scientific, industrial, and policy domains. While these developments open new possibilities for data analysis, they also raise fundamental statistical questions about when synthetic data can be used in a valid, reliable, and principled manner. This paper reviews the current landscape of synthetic data generation and use from a statistical perspective, with the goal of clarifying the assumptions under which synthetic data can meaningfully support downstream discovery, inference, and prediction. We survey major classes of modern generative models, their intended use cases, and the benefits they offer, while also highlighting their limitations and characteristic failure modes. We additionally examine common pitfalls that arise when synthetic data are treated as surrogates for real observations, including biases from model misspecification, attenuated uncertainty, and difficulties in generalization. Building on these insights, we discuss emerging frameworks for the principled use of synthetic data. We conclude with practical recommendations, open problems, and cautions intended to guide both method developers and applied researchers.

Conditional time series generation plays a critical role in addressing data scarcity and enabling causal analysis in real-world applications. Despite its increasing importance, the field lacks a standardized and systematic benchmarking framework for evaluating generative models across diverse conditions. To address this gap, we introduce the Conditional Time Series Generation Benchmark (ConTSG-Bench). ConTSG-Bench comprises a large-scale, well-aligned dataset spanning diverse conditioning modalities and levels of semantic abstraction, first enabling systematic evaluation of representative generation methods across these dimensions with a comprehensive suite of metrics for generation fidelity and condition adherence. Both the quantitative benchmarking and in-depth analyses of conditional generation behaviors have revealed the traits and limitations of the current approaches, highlighting critical challenges and promising research directions, particularly with respect to precise structural controllability and downstream task utility under complex conditions.

Deep learning in cardiac MRI (CMR) is fundamentally constrained by both data scarcity and privacy regulations. This study systematically benchmarks three generative architectures: Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models (DDPM), Latent Diffusion Models (LDM), and Flow Matching (FM) for synthetic CMR generation. Utilizing a two-stage pipeline where anatomical masks condition image synthesis, we evaluate generated data across three critical axes: fidelity, utility, and privacy. Our results show that diffusion-based models, particularly DDPM, provide the most effective balance between downstream segmentation utility, image fidelity, and privacy preservation under limited-data conditions, while FM demonstrates promising privacy characteristics with slightly lower task-level performance. These findings quantify the trade-offs between cross-domain generalization and patient confidentiality, establishing a framework for safe and effective synthetic data augmentation in medical imaging.

Evaluation of AI systems often requires synthetic test cases, particularly for rare or safety-critical conditions that are difficult to observe in operational data. Generative AI offers a promising approach for producing such data through controllable image editing, but its usefulness depends on whether the resulting images are sufficiently realistic to support meaningful evaluation. We present a scalable framework for assessing the realism of synthetic image-editing methods and apply it to the task of adding environmental conditions-fog, rain, snow, and nighttime-to car-mounted camera images. Using 40 clear-day images, we compare rule-based augmentation libraries with generative AI image-editing models. Realism is evaluated using two complementary automated metrics: a vision-language model (VLM) jury for perceptual realism assessment, and embedding-based distributional analysis to measure similarity to genuine adverse-condition imagery. Generative AI methods substantially outperform rule-based approaches, with the best generative method achieving approximately 3.6 times the acceptance rate of the best rule-based method. Performance varies across conditions: fog proves easiest to simulate, while nighttime transformations remain challenging. Notably, the VLM jury assigns imperfect acceptance even to real adverse-condition imagery, establishing practical ceilings against which synthetic methods can be judged. By this standard, leading generative methods match or exceed real-image performance for most conditions. These results suggest that modern generative image-editing models can enable scalable generation of realistic adverse-condition imagery for evaluation pipelines. Our framework therefore provides a practical approach for scalable realism evaluation, though validation against human studies remains an important direction for future work.

Tabular synthetic data generators are typically trained to match observational distributions, which can yield high conventional utility (e.g., column correlations, predictive accuracy) yet poor preservation of structural relations relevant to causal analysis and out-of-distribution (OOD) reasoning. When the downstream use of synthetic data involves causal reasoning -- estimating treatment effects, evaluating policies, or testing mediation pathways -- merely matching the observational distribution is insufficient: structural fidelity and treatment-mechanism preservation become essential. We propose CausalWrap (CW), a model-agnostic wrapper that injects partial causal knowledge (PCK) -- trusted edges, forbidden edges, and qualitative/monotonic constraints -- into any pretrained base generator (GAN, VAE, or diffusion model), without requiring access to its internals. CW learns a lightweight, differentiable post-hoc correction map applied to samples from the base generator, optimized with causal penalty terms under an augmented-Lagrangian schedule. We provide theoretical results connecting penalty-based optimization to constraint satisfaction and relating approximate factorization to joint distributional control. We validate CW on simulated structural causal models (SCMs) with known ground-truth interventions, semi-synthetic causal benchmarks (IHDP and an ACIC-style suite), and a real-world ICU cohort (MIMIC-IV) with expert-elicited partial graphs. CW improves causal fidelity across diverse base generators -- e.g., reducing average treatment effect (ATE) error by up to 63% on ACIC and lifting ATE agreement from 0.00 to 0.38 on the intensive care unit (ICU) cohort -- while largely retaining conventional utility.

The development of deep learning methods for magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) is often hindered by limited availability of large, high-quality training datasets. While physics-based simulations are commonly used to mitigate this limitation, accurately modeling all in-vivo signal components remains challenging. In this work, we propose a data-driven framework for synthesizing in-vivo MRS data using a variational autoencoder (VAE) trained exclusively on measured single-voxel spectroscopy data. The model learns a low-dimensional latent representation of complex-valued spectra and enables generation of new samples through latent-space sampling and interpolation. The generative performance of the proposed approach is evaluated using a comprehensive set of complementary analyses, including reconstruction quality, feature-level similarity using low-dimensional embeddings, application-based signal quality metrics, and metabolite quantification agreement. The results demonstrate that the VAE accurately reconstructs dominant spectral patterns and generates synthetic spectra that occupy the same feature space as in-vivo data. In an example application targeting GABA-edited spectroscopy, augmenting limited subsets of transients with synthetic spectra improves signal quality metrics such as signal-to-noise ratio, linewidth, and shape scores. However, the results also reveal limitations of the generative approach, including under-representation of stochastic noise and reduced accuracy in absolute metabolite quantification, particularly for applications sensitive to concentration estimates. These findings highlight both potential and limitations of data-driven MRS synthesis. Beyond the proposed model, this study introduces a structured evaluation framework for generative MRS methods, emphasizing the importance of application-aware validation when synthetic data are used for downstream analysis.

Recent text-to-image (T2I) diffusion models produce visually stunning images and demonstrate excellent prompt following. But do they perform well as synthetic vision data generators? In this work, we revisit the promise of synthetic data as a scalable substitute for real training sets and uncover a surprising performance regression. We generate large-scale synthetic datasets using state-of-the-art T2I models released between 2022 and 2025, train standard classifiers solely on this synthetic data, and evaluate them on real test data. Despite observable advances in visual fidelity and prompt adherence, classification accuracy on real test data consistently declines with newer T2I models as training data generators. Our analysis reveals a hidden trend: These models collapse to a narrow, aesthetic-centric distribution that undermines diversity and real data distribution coverage. Overall, our findings challenge a growing assumption in vision research, namely that progress in generative realism implies progress in data realism. We thus highlight an urgent need to rethink the capabilities of modern T2I models as reliable training data generators.

Synthetic data generated by video generative models has shown promise for robot learning as a scalable pipeline, but it often suffers from inconsistent action quality due to imperfectly generated videos. Recently, vision-language models (VLMs) have been leveraged to validate video quality, but they have limitations in distinguishing physically accurate videos and, even then, cannot directly evaluate the generated actions themselves. To tackle this issue, we introduce RoboCurate, a novel synthetic robot data generation framework that evaluates and filters the quality of annotated actions by comparing them with simulation replay. Specifically, RoboCurate replays the predicted actions in a simulator and assesses action quality by measuring the consistency of motion between the simulator rollout and the generated video. In addition, we unlock observation diversity beyond the available dataset via image-to-image editing and apply action-preserving video-to-video transfer to further augment appearance. We observe RoboCurate's generated data yield substantial relative improvements in success rates compared to using real data only, achieving +70.1% on GR-1 Tabletop (300 demos), +16.1% on DexMimicGen in the pre-training setup, and +179.9% in the challenging real-world ALLEX humanoid dexterous manipulation setting.

Synthetic images are increasingly used to augment object-detection training sets, but reliably evaluating a synthetic dataset before training remains difficult: standard global generative metrics (e.g., FID) often do not predict downstream detection mAP. We present a controlled evaluation of synthetic augmentation for YOLOv11 across three single-class detection regimes -- Traffic Signs (sparse/near-saturated), Cityscapes Pedestrian (dense/occlusion-heavy), and COCO PottedPlant (multi-instance/high-variability). We benchmark six GAN-, diffusion-, and hybrid-based generators over augmentation ratios from 10% to 150% of the real training split, and train YOLOv11 both from scratch and with COCO-pretrained initialization, evaluating on held-out real test splits ([email protected]:0.95). For each dataset-generator-augmentation configuration, we compute pre-training dataset metrics under a matched-size bootstrap protocol, including (i) global feature-space metrics in both Inception-v3 and DINOv2 embeddings and (ii) object-centric distribution distances over bounding-box statistics. Synthetic augmentation yields substantial gains in the more challenging regimes (up to +7.6% and +30.6% relative mAP in Pedestrian and PottedPlant, respectively) but is marginal in Traffic Signs and under pretrained fine-tuning. To separate metric signal from augmentation quantity, we report both raw and augmentation-controlled (residualized) correlations with multiple-testing correction, showing that metric-performance alignment is strongly regime-dependent and that many apparent raw associations weaken after controlling for augmentation level.

Neuromorphic engineering has a data problem. Despite the meteoric rise in the number of neuromorphic datasets published over the past ten years, the conclusion of a significant portion of neuromorphic research papers still states that there is a need for yet more data and even larger datasets. Whilst this need is driven in part by the sheer volume of data required by modern deep learning approaches, it is also fuelled by the current state of the available neuromorphic datasets and the difficulties in finding them, understanding their purpose, and determining the nature of their underlying task. This is further compounded by practical difficulties in downloading and using these datasets. This review starts by capturing a snapshot of the existing neuromorphic datasets, covering over 423 datasets, and then explores the nature of their tasks and the underlying structure of the presented data. Analysing these datasets shows the difficulties arising from their size, the lack of standardisation, and difficulties in accessing the actual data. This paper also highlights the growth in the size of individual datasets and the complexities involved in working with the data. However, a more important concern is the rise of synthetic datasets, created by either simulation or video-to-events methods. This review explores the benefits of simulated data for testing existing algorithms and applications, highlighting the potential pitfalls for exploring new applications of neuromorphic technologies. This review also introduces the concepts of meta-datasets, created from existing datasets, as a way of both reducing the need for more data, and to remove potential bias arising from defining both the dataset and the task.

Improving Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) requires benchmarks that can precisely validate architectural innovations. Current LLM-based SAE benchmarks are too noisy to differentiate architectural improvements, while commonly used synthetic-data experiments are too small-scale, unstandardized, and unrealistic to be meaningful. We introduce SynthSAEBench, a benchmark and toolkit for evaluating SAEs against large-scale synthetic data with realistic feature characteristics including correlation, hierarchy, and superposition, while providing ground-truth features and firings. SynthSAEBench acts as a controlled lower-bound test: SAE architectures that fail when the Linear Representation Hypothesis holds by construction have little hope on real LLMs. The benchmark reproduces known LLM SAE phenomena including the disconnect between reconstruction and latent quality, poor SAE probing, and a precision-recall trade-off mediated by L0, demonstrating that SynthSAEBench findings reproduce results on LLM SAEs. We further identify a novel failure mode: Matching Pursuit SAEs exploit superposition noise to improve reconstruction without learning ground-truth features, suggesting more expressive encoding procedures can easily overfit. SynthSAEBench complements LLM benchmarks with ground-truth features and controlled ablations for diagnosing SAE failure modes, while providing a clear target for SAE architecture work.

How well can AI-derived synthetic research data replicate the responses of human participants? An emerging literature has begun to engage with this question, which carries deep implications for organizational research practice. This article presents a comparison between a human-respondent survey of 420 Silicon Valley coders and developers and synthetic survey data designed to simulate real survey takers generated by five leading Generative AI Large Language Models: ChatGPT Thinking 5 Pro, Claude Sonnet 4.5 Pro plus Claude CoWork 1.123, Gemini Advanced 2.5 Pro, Incredible 1.0, and DeepSeek 3.2. Our findings reveal that while AI agents produced technically plausible results that lean more towards replicability and harmonization than assumed, none were able to capture the counterintuitive insights that made the human survey valuable. Moreover, deviations grouped together for all models, leaving the real data as the outlier. Our key finding is that while leading LLMs are increasingly being used to scale, replicate and replace human survey responses in research, these advances only show an increased capacity to parrot conventional wisdom in harmony with each other rather than revealing novel findings. If synthetic respondents are used in future research, we need more replicable validation protocols and reporting standards for when and where synthetic survey data can be used responsibly, a gap that this paper fills. Our results suggest that synthetic survey responses cannot meaningfully model real human social beliefs within organizations, particularly in contexts lacking previously documented evidence. We conclude that synthetic survey-based research should be cast not as a substitute for rigorous survey methods, but as an increasingly reliable pre- or post-fieldwork instrument for identifying societal assumptions, conventional wisdoms, and other expectations about research populations.

Time series data are essential for a wide range of applications, yet access to high-quality datasets is often constrained by privacy concerns, acquisition costs, and labelling challenges. Synthetic time series generation has emerged as a promising approach to address these limitations. In this work, we investigate the use of complex network mappings for synthetic time series generation, focusing on the Quantile Graph (QG) representation and its inverse. While the inverse QG mapping has been previously proposed, its potential as a general-purpose data generator has not been systematically evaluated. We address this gap through a comprehensive empirical study assessing both the fidelity and utility of synthetic time series generated by the Inverse Quantile Graph (InvQG) framework. The evaluation combines statistical feature analysis, network-based topological characteristics, and performance in downstream clustering and classification tasks, using simulated and real-world datasets. The results show that InvQG effectively preserves marginal distributions and short-term temporal dependencies across a wide range of models, while exhibiting predictable limitations in capturing long-range or higher-order dynamics.

Synthetic medical image data can unlock the potential of deep learning (DL)-based clinical decision support (CDS) systems through the creation of large scale, privacy-preserving, training sets. Despite the significant progress in this field, there is still a largely unanswered research question: "How can we quantitatively assess the similarity of a synthetically generated set of images with a set of real images in a given application domain?". Today, answers to this question are mainly provided via user evaluation studies, inception-based measures, and the classification performance achieved on synthetic images. This paper proposes a novel measure to assess the similarity between synthetically generated and real sets of images, in terms of their utility for the development of DL-based CDS systems. Inspired by generalized neural additive models, and unlike inception-based measures, the proposed measure is interpretable (Interpretable Utility Similarity, IUS), explaining why a synthetic dataset could be more useful than another one in the context of a CDS system based on clinically relevant image features. The experimental results on publicly available benchmark datasets from various color medical imaging modalities including endoscopic, dermoscopic and fundus imaging, indicate that selecting synthetic images of high utility similarity using IUS can result in relative improvements of up to 54.6% in terms of classification performance. The generality of IUS for synthetic data assessment is demonstrated also for grayscale X-ray and ultrasound imaging modalities. IUS implementation is available at https://github.com/innoisys/ius.

Machine-learning models for quantum-dot state recognition are commonly trained using synthetic data, where large labeled datasets can be generated efficiently. However, strong performance on simulated data does not guarantee equally strong performance in experiments. Here, we benchmark five neural network architectures for quantum-dot state recognition using a shared synthetic training dataset and independent synthetic and experimental test sets. We compare convolutional and fully connected neural networks, a mixture density network, a vision transformer, and a U-Net across multiple training set sizes and two input normalization schemes. We find that model performance and rankings are closely preserved when moving from held-out synthetic patches to previously unseen simulated devices, but change substantially when the same models are evaluated on experimental data. In particular, the architecture achieving the highest synthetic performance is not the one that performs best experimentally. Input normalization further affects training behavior and, for some architectures, synthetic-to-experimental transfer. These results show that synthetic benchmark performance alone is insufficient to select models for experimental deployment and highlight the need to jointly evaluate architecture, preprocessing, data efficiency, model complexity, and experimental transfer when developing machine-learning tools for automated quantum-dot characterization and control.

Synthetic data has been increasingly used to train frontier generative models. However, recent studies raise key concerns that iteratively retraining a generative model on its self-generated synthetic data may keep deteriorating model performance, a phenomenon often coined model collapse. In this paper, we investigate ways to modify the synthetic retraining process to avoid model collapse, and even possibly help reverse the trend from collapse to improvement. Our key finding is that by injecting information through an external synthetic data verifier, whether a human or a better model, synthetic retraining will not cause model collapse. Specifically, we situate our theoretical analysis in the fundamental linear regression setting, showing that verifier-guided retraining can yield near-term improvements, but ultimately drives the parameter estimate to the verifier's "knowledge center" in the long run. Our theory further predicts that, unless the verifier is perfectly reliable, these early gains will plateau and may even reverse. Indeed, our experiments across linear regression, Variational Autoencoders (VAEs) trained on MNIST, and fining-tuning SmolLM2-135M on the XSUM task confirm these theoretical insights.

This study introduces a Large Language Model (LLM) scheme for generating key attributes of travel diaries in agent-based transportation models, including purpose, mode and distance, to assess the underlying viability of LLMs for activity generation tasks. While traditional approaches rely on large quantities of proprietary household travel surveys, our method generates personas stochastically from open-source American Community Survey (ACS) and Smart Location Database (SLD) data, then synthesizes diaries through direct prompting. Our study features a novel one-to-cohort realism score: a composite of four metrics (Trip Count Score, Interval Score, Purpose Score, and Mode Score) validated against the Connecticut Statewide Transportation Study (CSTS) diaries, matched across demographic variables. Our validation utilizes Jensen-Shannon Divergence to measure distributional similarities between generated and real diaries. When compared to diaries generated with classical methods (Negative Binomial for trip generation; Multinomial Logit for mode/purpose) calibrated on the validation set, LLM generated diaries achieve comparable overall realism (LLM mean: 0.692 vs. 0.628). The LLM excels in determining trip purpose, and its trip mode predictions demonstrate greater consistency (a narrower Realism Score distribution). Meanwhile, classical models lead to better numerical estimates of trip count and activity duration. Aggregate validation confirms the LLM's statistical representativeness (LLM mean: 0.779 vs. 0.706), demonstrating LLM's zero-shot viability and establishing a quantifiable metric of diary realism for future synthetic diary evaluation systems.

The growing demand for scalable psychological counseling highlights the need for high-quality, privacy-compliant data, yet such data remains scarce. Here we introduce MAGneT, a novel multi-agent framework for synthetic psychological counseling session generation that decomposes counselor response generation into coordinated sub-tasks handled by specialized LLM agents, each modeling a key psychological technique. Unlike prior single-agent approaches, MAGneT better captures the structure and nuance of real counseling. We further propose a unified evaluation framework that consolidates diverse automatic metrics and expands expert assessment from four to nine counseling aspects, thus addressing inconsistencies in prior evaluation protocols. Empirically, MAGneT substantially outperforms existing methods: experts prefer MAGneT-generated sessions in 77.2% of cases on average across the nine aspects over the strongest baseline, and sessions generated by MAGneT using Llama3-8B-Instruct backbone yield 3.2% higher general counseling skills and 4.3% higher CBT-specific skills on cognitive therapy rating scale (CTRS). An open source Llama3-8B-Instruct model fine-tuned on MAGneT-generated data also outperforms models fine-tuned using baseline synthetic datasets by 6.9% on average on CTRS. We make our code, data and fine-tuned model public.

Actuarial ratemaking depends on high-quality data, yet access to such data is often limited by the cost of obtaining new data, privacy concerns, etc. In this paper, we explore synthetic-data generation as a potential solution to these issues. In addition to generative methods previously studied in the actuarial literature, we explore and benchmark another class of approaches based on Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations (MICE). In a comparative study using an open-source dataset, MICE-based models are evaluated against other generative models like Variational Autoencoders and Conditional Tabular Generative Adversarial Networks. We assess how well synthetic data preserves the original marginal distributions of variables as well as the multivariate relationships among covariates. The consistency between Generalized Linear Models (GLMs) trained on synthetic data with GLMs trained on the original data is also investigated. Furthermore, we assess the ease of use of each generative approach and study the impact of generically augmenting original data with synthetic data on the estimation of GLMs for predicting claim counts. Our results highlight the potential of MICE-based methods in creating high-fidelity tabular data while offering lower implementation complexity compared to deep generative models.

Synthetic data hold substantial potential to address practical challenges in epidemiology due to restricted data access and privacy concerns. However, many current methods suffer from limited quality, high computational demands, and complexity for non-experts. Furthermore, common evaluation strategies for synthetic data often fail to directly reflect statistical utility and measure privacy risks sufficiently. Against this background, a critical underexplored question is whether synthetic data can reliably reproduce key findings from epidemiological research while preserving privacy. We propose adversarial random forests (ARF) as an efficient and convenient method for synthesizing tabular epidemiological data. To evaluate its performance, we replicated statistical analyses from six epidemiological publications covering blood pressure, anthropometry, myocardial infarction, accelerometry, loneliness, and diabetes, from the German National Cohort (NAKO Gesundheitsstudie), the Bremen STEMI Registry U45 Study, and the Guelph Family Health Study. We further assessed how dataset dimensionality and variable complexity affect the quality of synthetic data, and contextualized ARF's performance by comparison with commonly used tabular data synthesizers in terms of utility, privacy, generalization, and runtime. Across all replicated studies, results on ARF-generated synthetic data consistently aligned with original findings. Even for datasets with relatively low sample size-to-dimensionality ratios, replication outcomes closely matched the original results across descriptive and inferential analyses. Reduced dimensionality and variable complexity further enhanced synthesis quality. ARF demonstrated favourable performance regarding utility, privacy preservation, and generalization relative to other synthesizers and superior computational efficiency.

Visual fall detection models are usually trained on small, staged datasets. Their real-world utility remains unclear; such data lacks diversity and evaluation protocols differ from paper to paper. We propose OmniFall, a unified benchmark of 15k videos (80 hours) with frame-level annotations in a single 16-class taxonomy. It spans three domains: OF-Staged unifies eight staged datasets with cross-subject and cross-view splits; OF-Synthetic adds 12k videos (17 h) with controlled demographic and environmental diversity; and OF-In-the-Wild provides a test-only set of genuine accident videos. We evaluate fine-tuned models as well as much larger zero-shot multimodal LLMs. On in-the-wild fall events, both do comparably well. The clinically critical fallen state is where they part: zero-shot models keep confusing fallen with lying, whereas models fine-tuned on synthetic data with explicit fallen-state scenes do substantially better. We release the unified annotations, the synthetic data, and the in-the-wild test set to foster the development of fall and fallen-state detectors for uncontrolled environments. Dataset: https://hf.co/datasets/simplexsigil2/omnifall

Existing evaluations of tabular synthesis models rely primarily on low-order statistics and downstream task performance, leaving multivariate causal relationships that go beyond pairwise correlations largely unmeasured. We argue that a systematic evaluation on high-order structural information is a crucial first step in addressing this issue in tabular data synthesis. In this paper, we present high-order structural causal information as a natural form of prior knowledge and introduce a benchmark framework to evaluate tabular synthesis models. This framework allows us to generate benchmark datasets through a flexible range of data generation processes, allowing for the training of tabular synthesis models using these datasets for further evaluation. We propose multiple benchmark tasks, high-order metrics, and causal inference tasks as downstream tasks for evaluating the quality of synthetic data generated by the trained models. Our experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of the benchmark framework in evaluating the model's ability to capture high-order structural causal information. Furthermore, our benchmarking results provide an initial assessment of state-of-the-art tabular synthesis models. These results reveal significant gaps between ideal and actual performance and highlight how baseline methods differ. We position the framework as a controlled diagnostic benchmark for causal fidelity, complementing existing low-order and downstream evaluations. We open source the benchmark framework, including both code and data along with documentation, to support further research in this area.