arXiv subjects

Mahdi Naser Moghadasi

Publications and source records attributed to Mahdi Naser Moghadasi.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

A Later Test Set Is Not a New Domain: Pretraining Familiarity Survives a Contamination-Free Hold-Out

Time-series foundation models are evaluated almost exclusively on public archives that predate them, so a strong score cannot be separated from having seen the test set during pretraining. The obvious remedy is a hold-out that postdates the models. We build one: thirteen forecasters -- four classical, three trained per dataset, six pretrained -- on seven groups drawn from five domains, every observation published after the last model was released, and every dataset rebuildable without an API key. Under this protocol pretrained models win 5 of 7 groups, lose one to a Theta baseline, and on daily exchange rates are indistinguishable from a seasonal naive forecast, along with every other method tested. We then ask what separates the wins from the losses, and report a negative result: the two intrinsic properties one would reach for -- seasonal strength and spectral entropy, measured on the input window -- do not account for the pattern, and seasonal strength is if anything negatively associated with the advantage. What does track it is corpus familiarity. Our largest gain (28% lower MASE than the best classical method, on weekly Wikipedia pageviews) falls on Wikipedia pageviews, the domain TimesFM's authors describe as the bulk of its pretraining corpus, at the same granularities and differing only in time window. Within the pretrained family, where every model forecasts identical series so that series difficulty cancels, the TimesFM family outranks the Chronos family by -0.53 ranks on Wikipedia against -0.09 everywhere else (1,500 vs. 754 series, Mann-Whitney p < 1e-5). We conclude that a temporal hold-out removes memorisation of a window but not familiarity with a domain, that benchmarks therefore need domain hold-outs stated relative to disclosed corpora, and that the practitioner's question is less which model is better than whether their domain is one the model was raised on.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

What Twelve LLM Agent Benchmark Papers Disclose About Themselves: A Pilot Audit and an Open Scoring Schema

We read twelve well-known LLM agent benchmark papers and recorded, dimension by dimension, what each paper actually says about how its evaluation was run. The motivation came from a familiar frustration: two papers will report results on the same benchmark with the same model name and disagree, and you cannot tell why -- the scaffold, the sampling settings, the subset, or the evaluator version. In many cases the published artifact does not let you answer. This paper is an implementation report on the attempt. We designed a small audit schema (five fields: benchmark identity, harness specification, inference settings, cost reporting, failure breakdown), wrote a scoring codebook with the boundary cases we hit during pilot scoring, applied it to twelve canonical papers (eight agent, four classical static), and recorded what we saw. We score the disclosure of an agent run, not its correctness, and make no claim that disclosure implies a trustworthy result. The mean audit score across the eight agent-benchmark papers is 0.38 (out of 1.0), and across the four classical static benchmarks 0.66; the largest gap is on cost (none of the eight agent benchmark papers disclose inference cost in any form) and on harness specification (none fully disclose a content-addressed container image of the evaluation environment). We release the schema as a JSON Schema file, the codebook as a Markdown document, and the raw scoring sheet as a CSV. The scoring was performed by a single auditor in one pass; a multi-rater audit is the natural next step, and we discuss what we think it would change.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Cross-Paradigm Knowledge Distillation: A Comprehensive Study of Bidirectional Transfer Between Random Forests and Deep Neural Networks for Big Data Applications

The exponential growth of big data has intensified the need for efficient and interpretable machine learning models that can handle diverse data characteristics while maintaining computational efficiency. Knowledge distillation has primarily focused on neural network-to-neural network transfer, leaving cross-paradigm knowledge transfer largely unexplored. This paper presents the first comprehensive study of bidirectional knowledge distillation between Random Forests (RF) and Deep Neural Networks (DNN), addressing critical gaps in ensemble learning and model compression for big data applications. We propose novel methodologies including progressive multi-stage distillation, multi-teacher ensemble distillation from diverse tree models, and uncertainty-aware cross-paradigm transfer mechanisms. Through 144 comprehensive experiments across 6 diverse datasets encompassing classification and regression tasks, we demonstrate that bidirectional RF-DL distillation achieves competitive performance while providing complementary benefits: interpretability from tree models and expressiveness from neural networks. Our results show that multi-teacher ensemble distillation consistently outperforms traditional approaches, with NN-COMPACT achieving 98.13% classification accuracy and NN-WIDE reaching 92.6% R^2 score in regression tasks. The proposed framework enables deployment flexibility in big data environments, allowing optimal model selection based on computational constraints and interpretability requirements. This work establishes a new research direction in cross-paradigm knowledge transfer with significant implications for interpretable AI and scalable model deployment in resource-constrained big data systems.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Transformer Scalability Crisis: The First Comprehensive Empirical Analysis of Performance Walls in Modern Language Models

Despite the remarkable success of transformer architectures in natural language processing, their scalability limitations remain poorly understood through systematic empirical analysis. This paper presents the first comprehensive large-scale evaluation of 118 transformer models across seven distinct architectural categories, revealing fundamental performance walls that manifest as hard deployment constraints. Our systematic benchmarking methodology uncovers a critical scalability crisis: while 88.1% of models successfully process sequences up to 512 tokens, this drops dramatically to 44.9% at 1024 tokens, with complete failure (0%) at 2048 tokens. Through rigorous analysis of loading times, memory consumption, and computational efficiency across sequence lengths from 128 to 2048 tokens, we demonstrate that compressed models achieve superior parameter efficiency (649.2 tokens/sec/M parameters) compared to large generative models (12.5 tokens/sec/M). Our findings challenge prevailing scaling assumptions and provide the first quantitative evidence that the theoretical O(n2) attention complexity translates into measurable performance walls. This work establishes new benchmarking methodologies for transformer evaluation and provides critical insights for practical deployment decisions in production environments.

cs.LG↗