Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
37 lines (26 loc) · 1.62 KB

File metadata and controls

37 lines (26 loc) · 1.62 KB

BuffData original-versus-generated accuracy gate

Every condition uses the same AG News test rows, vocabulary, PyTorch architecture, hyperparameters, and three fixed random seeds. No LLM call is made by this benchmark.

Regression repair (3,000 train / 2,000 test)

Condition Rows Accuracy Macro-F1
original_dataset 3000 0.8315 ± 0.0074 0.8307 ± 0.0076
regressed_generated 3000 0.8070 ± 0.0040 0.8061 ± 0.0037
repaired_generated 3000 0.8315 ± 0.0074 0.8307 ± 0.0076

The repaired generated data recovers +2.45 accuracy points and finishes +0.00 points from the matching original control. It changes 0 texts, compared with 2,767 in the regressed output.

Value test: contaminated original vs generated optimized (3,000 source / 2,000 test)

The original condition contains all 3,000 source rows plus disclosed conflicting-label duplicates, class-skewing duplicates, and empty rows. BuffData generates the optimized condition from the exact same input.

Condition Rows Accuracy Macro-F1
original_contaminated 5700 0.7515 ± 0.0088 0.7509 ± 0.0077
generated_optimized 3000 0.8425 ± 0.0088 0.8415 ± 0.0089

Generated optimized data improves accuracy by +9.10 points and macro-F1 by +9.06 points.

Gates

  • Regression recovery: PASS
  • Strict original preservation (generated accuracy >= original and identical text): PASS
  • Contaminated-data value: PASS

These results establish behavior for these fixed samples and this lightweight classifier; they do not promise the same gain on every dataset or model.