Learning based on neurovectors for tabular data: a new neural network approach
J.C. Husillos, A. Gallego, A. Roma, A. Troncoso

TL;DR
This paper introduces Neurovectors, a novel neural network paradigm for tabular data that encodes information in vector spaces, offering improved interpretability and efficiency over traditional models.
Contribution
It presents a new Neurovector-based learning approach that structures data via interconnected vectors, differing from weight-based neural networks, and demonstrates competitive performance.
Findings
Neurovectors achieve accuracy comparable to standard models.
The approach enhances interpretability of the learning process.
Experimental results validate effectiveness on benchmark datasets.
Abstract
In this paper, we present a novel learning approach based on Neurovectors, an innovative paradigm that structures information through interconnected nodes and vector relationships for tabular data processing. Unlike traditional artificial neural networks that rely on weight adjustment through backpropagation, Neurovectors encode information by structuring data in vector spaces where energy propagation, rather than traditional weight updates, drives the learning process, enabling a more adaptable and explainable learning process. Our method generates dynamic representations of knowledge through neurovectors, thereby improving both the interpretability and efficiency of the predictive model. Experimental results using datasets from well-established repositories such as the UCI machine learning repository and Kaggle are reported both for classification and regression. To evaluate its…
Peer Reviews
Decision·Submitted to ICLR 2026
1. The paper presents a well-motivated idea. Transforming tabular data into vectorized or text-like representations to make them compatible with large language models (LLMs). This direction is timely and meaningful, as it moves beyond conventional tree-based models toward architectures that can leverage foundation models. 2. The paper is clearly written and well-structured, making the proposed approach easy to follow and conceptually accessible.
1. The experimental evaluation is rather limited in scope. The paper includes only a few datasets, and the results in Table 2 are not convincing. For instance, on Breast Cancer, the proposed method performs comparably to the baseline; on Absenteeism at Work, results are reported as N/A; and Red Wine Quality is a small, non-representative dataset. To substantiate the claimed advantages, additional experiments on more diverse and large-scale tabular datasets are necessary. Moreover, the paper omit
* **Simplicity & interpretability:** Prediction follows transparent token overlaps; energies provide per-instance diagnostics. * **Gradient-free training:** Create-on-error storage avoids backpropagation/hyperparameter sweeps, attractive for low-resource settings. * **Clear, reproducible core:** Retrieval and tie-breaking rules are explicit; basic complexity can be reasoned about via hash lookups and candidate ordering. * **Potential efficiency:** If storage/candidates remain small, inference co
* **Limited evaluation:** Only a few datasets; no multi-seed cross-validation; several strong tabular baselines are missing (CatBoost/LightGBM/XGBoost, TabPFN, FT-Transformer); statistical tests and average-rank analyses are absent. * **Tokenization brittleness:** Using **exact numeric values** as tokens risks near-zero overlap; discretization/quantization schemes (or similarity metrics) are not explored. * **Compute claims unclear:** FLOP comparisons are indirect; no **wall-clock**, **RAM footp
The central idea is interesting and the experimental results are believable.
The major weakness is that the method proposed in this paper is not novel; it is a variation of k-nearest neighbor. Specifically, Equations 6 and 7 say that the predicted label of a test example is the label of the training example with maximum count(NV) score. The score of a training example is the number of its feature values that equal the value of the same feature in the test example. The predicted label is the label of the single nearest (most similar) neighbor of the training example, whe
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) · Machine Learning and Data Classification · Advanced Neural Network Applications
