Beyond Accuracy and Complexity: The Effective Information Criterion for Structurally Stable Symbolic Regression
Zihan Yu, Guanren Wang, Jingtao Ding, Huandong Wang, Yong Li
Abstract
Symbolic regression (SR) traditionally balances accuracy and complexity, implicitly assuming that simpler formulas are structurally more rational. We argue that this assumption is insufficient: existing algorithms often exploit this metric to discover accurate and compact but structurally irrational formulas that are numerically ill-conditioned and physically inexplicable. Inspired by the structural stability of real physical laws, we propose the Effective Information Criterion (EIC) to quantify formula rationality. EIC models formulas as information channels and measures the amplification of inherent rounding noise during recursive calculation, effectively distinguishing physically plausible structures from pathological ones without relying on ground truth. Our analysis reveals a stark structural stability gap between human-derived equations and SR-discovered results. By integrating EIC into SR workflows, we provide explicit structural guidance: for heuristic search, EIC steers algorithms toward stable regions to yield superior Pareto frontiers; for generative models, EIC-based filtering improves pre-training sample efficiency by 2–4 times and boosts generalization by 22.4%. Finally, an extensive study with 108 human experts shows that EIC aligns with human preferences in 70% of cases, validating structural stability as a critical prerequisite for human-perceived interpretability. We release our code at https://github.com/tsinghua-fib-lab/EIC
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Builds on13
- Deep Learning For Symbolic MathematicsGuillaume Lample, François ChartonICLR 2020 · 477 citations
- Deep symbolic regression: Recovering mathematical expressions from data via risk-seeking policy gradientsBrenden K. Petersen, Mikel Landajuela, T. Nathan Mundhenk, Cláudio Prata Santiago et al.ICLR 2021 · 444 citations
- End-to-end Symbolic Regression with TransformersPierre-Alexandre Kamienny, Stéphane d'Ascoli, Guillaume Lample, François ChartonNeurIPS 2022 · 320 citations
- Neural Symbolic Regression that scalesLuca Biggio, Tommaso Bendinelli, Alexander Neitz, Aurélien Lucchi et al.ICML 2021 · 251 citations
- Transformer-based Planning for Symbolic RegressionParshin Shojaee, Kazem Meidani, Amir Barati Farimani, Chandan K. ReddyNeurIPS 2023 · 116 citations
Related papers
- AI Feynman 2.0: Pareto-optimal symbolic regression exploiting graph modularitySilviu-Marian Udrescu, Andrew K. Tan, Jiahai Feng, Orisvaldo Neto et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 267 citations
- Deep Generative Symbolic RegressionSamuel Holt, Zhaozhi Qian, Mihaela van der SchaarICLR 2023 · 4 citations
- GenSR: Symbolic regression based on equation generative spaceQian Li, Yuxiao Hu, Juncheng Liu, Yuntian ChenICLR 2026 · 7 citations
- Pareto-Optimal Fronts for Benchmarking Symbolic Regression AlgorithmsKei Sen Fong, Mehul MotaniICML 2025
- Learning Symbolic Models for Graph-structured Physical MechanismHongzhi Shi, Jingtao Ding, Yufan Cao, Quanming Yao et al.ICLR 2023
