Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Evaluating quality in synthetic data generation for large tabular health datasets

There is no consensus in the field of synthetic data on concise metrics for quality evaluations or benchmarks on large health datasets, such as historical epidemiological data. This study presents an evaluation of seven recent models from major machine learning families. The models were evaluated using four different datasets, each with a distinct scale. To ensure a fair comparison, we systematically tuned the hyperparameters of each model for each dataset. We propose a methodology for evaluating the fidelity of synthesized joint distributions, aligning metrics with visualization on a single plot. This method is applicable to any dataset and is complemented by a domain-specific analysis o...

AuthorsJean-Baptiste Escudié, Benjamin Barnes, Stefan Meisegeier et al.
Primary categorycs.LG
Published17 April 2026
Last updated at source17 April 2026
cs.LG
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/76f1291f-604d-4d50-bf84-96de0a3329d5" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.