Skip to content
← Back to explorer

Generalizing Numerical Reasoning in Table Data through Operation Sketches and Self-Supervised Learning

Hanjun Cho, Gahyun Yoo, Hanseong Kim, Jay-Yoon Lee · Apr 23, 2026 · Citations: 0

How to use this page

Provisional trust

This page is a lightweight research summary built from the abstract and metadata while deeper extraction catches up.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Evidence quality

Provisional

Derived from abstract and metadata only.

Abstract

Numerical reasoning over expert-domain tables often exhibits high in-domain accuracy but limited robustness to domain shift. Models trained with supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on specific datasets tend to rely on header-operation shortcuts rather than structural reasoning. We introduce TaNOS, a continual pre-training framework comprising three components: (i) header anonymization to reduce lexical memorization, (ii) operation sketches that provide minimal structural cues, and (iii) self-supervised pretraining that constructs correctness-guaranteed program-question pairs from given tables in a program-first manner. By decoupling domain semantics and numerical operation structure, TaNOS improves the transferability of numerical reasoning. Applied to an 8B instruction-tuned model, TaNOS achieves 80.13% execution accuracy on FinQA with only 10% train data, outperforming SFT baseline (73.97%) with full train data and proprietary models such as GPT-5, Gemini-2.5-Pro. Furthermore, in the domain-shift experiments, TaNOS displays nearly-negligible cross-domain gap (<2pp) when standard SFT shows over 10pp gap. These results suggest that structural guidance with operation sketches, header-agnostic representations, and correctness-guaranteed self-supervision can improve the robustness of numerical reasoning across diverse expert-domain tables.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

  • This page is still relying on abstract and metadata signals, not a fuller protocol read.

Should You Rely On This Paper?

Signal extraction is still processing. This page currently shows metadata-first guidance until structured protocol fields are ready.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A provisional background reference while structured extraction finishes.

Main weakness

This page is still relying on abstract and metadata signals, not a fuller protocol read.

Trust level

Provisional

Usefulness score

Unavailable

Eval-fit score is unavailable until extraction completes.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

Usefulness for eval research

Provisional (processing)

Extraction confidence 0%

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

provisional (inferred)

Expert verification

Directly usable for protocol triage.

"Numerical reasoning over expert-domain tables often exhibits high in-domain accuracy but limited robustness to domain shift."

Evaluation Modes

provisional (inferred)

Automatic metrics

Includes extracted eval setup.

"Numerical reasoning over expert-domain tables often exhibits high in-domain accuracy but limited robustness to domain shift."

Quality Controls

provisional (inferred)

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"Numerical reasoning over expert-domain tables often exhibits high in-domain accuracy but limited robustness to domain shift."

Benchmarks / Datasets

provisional (inferred)

Not extracted

No benchmark anchors detected.

"Numerical reasoning over expert-domain tables often exhibits high in-domain accuracy but limited robustness to domain shift."

Reported Metrics

provisional (inferred)

Accuracy

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

"Numerical reasoning over expert-domain tables often exhibits high in-domain accuracy but limited robustness to domain shift."

Rater Population

provisional (inferred)

Unknown

Rater source not explicitly reported.

"Numerical reasoning over expert-domain tables often exhibits high in-domain accuracy but limited robustness to domain shift."

Human Feedback Details

This page is using abstract-level cues only right now. Treat the signals below as provisional.

  • Potential human-data signal: Expert verification
  • Potential benchmark anchors: No benchmark names detected in abstract.
  • Abstract highlights: 3 key sentence(s) extracted below.

Evaluation Details

Evaluation fields are inferred from the abstract only.

  • Potential evaluation modes: Automatic metrics
  • Potential metric signals: Accuracy
  • Confidence: Provisional (metadata-only fallback).

Research Brief

Metadata summary

Numerical reasoning over expert-domain tables often exhibits high in-domain accuracy but limited robustness to domain shift.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • Numerical reasoning over expert-domain tables often exhibits high in-domain accuracy but limited robustness to domain shift.
  • Models trained with supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on specific datasets tend to rely on header-operation shortcuts rather than structural reasoning.
  • We introduce TaNOS, a continual pre-training framework comprising three components: (i) header anonymization to reduce lexical memorization, (ii) operation sketches that provide minimal structural cues, and (iii) self-supervised pretraining that constructs correctness-guaranteed program-question pairs from given tables in a program-first manner.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Validate inferred eval signals (Automatic metrics) against the full paper.
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

No related papers found for this item yet.

Get Started

Join the #1 Platform for AI Training Talent

Where top AI builders and expert AI Trainers connect to build the future of AI.
Self-Service
Post a Job
Post your project and get a shortlist of qualified AI Trainers and Data Labelers. Hire and manage your team in the tools you already use.
Managed Service
For Large Projects
Done-for-You
We recruit, onboard, and manage a dedicated team inside your tools. End-to-end operations for large or complex projects.
For Freelancers
Join as an AI Trainer
Find AI training and data labeling projects across platforms, all in one place. One profile, one application process, more opportunities.