Ranking Is Not Certification: Proxy Trust Signals in Symbolic Regression Separate Candidates Within a Problem but Collapse as Acceptance Gates

A symbolic-regression (SR) system that proposes a closed-form law usually also reports quantities that read as confidence: parsimony scores, ensemble stability, Bayesian predictive variance, conformal interval widths. We measure whether six such proxy trust signals — five computed without any target-region labels, plus one oracle-assisted extrapolation-excess gate — can separate a correct law from an engine-harvested stable-but-wrong one that fits the sampled region to R^2 >= 0.90. On a frozen 67-equation held-out test (60 scoreable clusters; hard negatives from PySR and gplearn), the answer splits cleanly across two estimands. Within a problem (ranking candidates for one dataset), five of the six signals stay clearly above chance, with concordance 0.63–1.00 across noise levels. Across problems (one acceptance threshold for all datasets — certification, in the limited sense of calibrated cross-problem acceptance), the same signals lose most of that advantage: at noise r=0.10 they degrade to chance-to-modest standardized partial AUC (0.49–0.71 in the low-false-positive regime) against the oracle target-region probe's 0.82; at r=0.30 both sides degrade, proxies to 0.48–0.58 and the oracle to 0.62. Ranking information does not transfer into calibrated acceptance, in part because the proxies' scales are not comparable across problems. The sharpest single finding: a SINDy-style inclusion-stability analogue is near-blind even for within-problem ranking (0.56–0.57 at all noise levels, against 1.00 for every other signal at zero noise), an effect that persists under both row and parametric bootstrap schemes. One signal (the excess gate) falls marginally below chance at the highest noise level; we treat this as a secondary observation. We provide no positive trust rule and make no claim that any interior-only signal can serve as a problem-transferable acceptance gate; all claims are scoped to this benchmark. Preprint. Not peer-reviewed. All claims are scoped to the benchmark described herein.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-06-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20671854
Primary Topic
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Ranking Is Not Certification: Proxy Trust Signals in Symbolic Regression Separate Candidates Within a Problem but Collapse as Acceptance Gates

Jun Liu
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
preprint

Ranking Is Not Certification: Proxy Trust Signals in Symbolic Regression Separate Candidates Within a Problem but Collapse as Acceptance Gates

Jun Liu
preprint en

Abstract

A symbolic-regression (SR) system that proposes a closed-form law usually also reports quantities that read as confidence: parsimony scores, ensemble stability, Bayesian predictive variance, conformal interval widths. We measure whether six such proxy trust signals — five computed without any target-region labels, plus one oracle-assisted extrapolation-excess gate — can separate a correct law from an engine-harvested stable-but-wrong one that fits the sampled region to R^2 >= 0.90. On a frozen 67-equation held-out test (60 scoreable clusters; hard negatives from PySR and gplearn), the answer splits cleanly across two estimands. Within a problem (ranking candidates for one dataset), five of the six signals stay clearly above chance, with concordance 0.63–1.00 across noise levels. Across problems (one acceptance threshold for all datasets — certification, in the limited sense of calibrated cross-problem acceptance), the same signals lose most of that advantage: at noise r=0.10 they degrade to chance-to-modest standardized partial AUC (0.49–0.71 in the low-false-positive regime) against the oracle target-region probe's 0.82; at r=0.30 both sides degrade, proxies to 0.48–0.58 and the oracle to 0.62. Ranking information does not transfer into calibrated acceptance, in part because the proxies' scales are not comparable across problems. The sharpest single finding: a SINDy-style inclusion-stability analogue is near-blind even for within-problem ranking (0.56–0.57 at all noise levels, against 1.00 for every other signal at zero noise), an effect that persists under both row and parametric bootstrap schemes. One signal (the excess gate) falls marginally below chance at the highest noise level; we treat this as a secondary observation. We provide no positive trust rule and make no claim that any interior-only signal can serve as a problem-transferable acceptance gate; all claims are scoped to this benchmark. Preprint. Not peer-reviewed. All claims are scoped to the benchmark described herein.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Chuzhou University (CN)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Ranking Is Not Certification: Proxy Trust Signals in Symbolic Regression Separate Candidates Within a Problem but Collapse as Acceptance Gates — Jun Liu · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS