Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · November 5, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Tabular Foundation Models (TFMs) adapt to a new task only through the labeled rows in their context. However, labels are expensive to acquire in real-world scenarios due to the need for highly specific domain knowledge to ensure high-quality data. Active in-context learning transfers classical acquisition rules to this setting, in which the model that guides acquisition changes with every label added. We ask how the value of diversity, predictive uncertainty and target-aware information gain changes as a frozen TFM acquires more context. For that, we study Target-Aware Nearest Neighbor (TANN) acquisition and the Expected Predictive Information Gain in Context (EPIC) and evaluate them against classical rules. Our study across twenty benchmarks with two well-established TFMs and classical GBDTs highlights three findings: (i) When: diversity-based acquisition is best during the first acquisition iterations; (ii) Where: labeling pool rows that serve the target inputs via a simple target-aware nearest-neighbor rule matters substantially; (iii) How: EPIC yields the best models at the label budget, retains on average 80--87% of the chance-corrected full-data performance with only 5-10% of the pool labeled on the eight benchmarks with the largest pools, and selects labels that also improve the predictive performance of gradient-boosted decision trees.