Mind the Long Tail: Understanding the Difficulty of Delay Detection in Business Processes

The early detection of delayed cases in business processes is a critical capability for organizations. Predictive process monitoring (PPM) supports this task by using historical event logs to predict the remaining time of ongoing cases, enabling timely interventions to avoid missed deadlines and service level violations. Although remaining time prediction has advanced considerably through sophisticated deep learning architectures, little is known about the intrinsic difficulty of delay detection itself. Since performance is typically assessed using aggregate metrics, prior work provides limited insight into how models perform across the target distribution, especially on the operationally most critical cases with large delays. In this paper, we address this gap by analyzing the difficulty of delay detection. Across 14 event logs, we show that remaining times are typically strongly right-skewed, with only a small fraction of cases exhibiting large delays. Existing models capture the mode of this distribution well but perform poorly on high-delay cases. We further uncover pronounced heteroscedasticity, showing that predictive uncertainty increases with delay magnitude. Based on these findings, we evaluate approaches to mitigate the imbalance problem, but find only limited benefits, suggesting that the key underlying problem may not be imbalance but higher uncertainty associated with delayed cases. We show that this correlation can be exploited to substantially improve the identification of delayed cases. Overall, our work provides new insights into the sources of difficulty in delay detection and identifies uncertainty-aware modeling as a promising direction for future PPM research.

Mood Matters: How Syntactic Sensitivity Undermines Safety Alignment

Large language models typically undergo post-training to align them with safety policies but there exist many sophisticated jailbreaks that sidestep established safeguards. For instance, prior work by Andriushchenko et al. (2025) has found that changing the grammatical tense from present to past can be enough to elicit harmful responses. In this work, we uncover a more general failure of non-imperative syntactic forms. We demonstrate that this syntactic vulnerability exists in 16 models up to 70B parameters, using behavioral evaluation. To investigate the root cause, we apply causal mediation analysis, finding that refusal is partially conditioned on upstream syntactic features. By steering these purely syntactic features we are able to trigger and suppress refusal. Finally, we trace this ill-conditioning to linguistically biased post-training data of open-source models and show that increasing syntactic diversity can mitigate the issue. Our findings suggest that current alignment approaches introduce confounders that prevent a pure semantic grounding of the refusal decision.

Temporal Knowledge Graph Forecasting under Distribution Shifts: A Synthetic Evaluation

Temporal knowledge graphs (TKGs) represent evolving relational systems, whose underlying data-generating processes often change over time. Yet, TKG forecasting models are commonly evaluated only on empirical benchmark datasets that provide limited insight into the models' robustness to such distribution shifts. Recognising this issue, we study TKG forecasting under controlled shift environments using a synthetic TKG generator that encodes three temporal and structural properties -- recurrence, homophily, and periodicity -- as data-generating mechanisms. This allows us to evaluate seven forecasting architectures under stationary and shifting regimes. Our experiments suggest that robustness in TKG forecasting is highly signal-dependent. Recurrence-based and periodic regularities are largely recoverable under stationary conditions, and simple memory-based baselines can be competitive when recurrence dominates the data. However, structural breaks reveal limitations in model adaptivity, with shifts in latent entity-community structure posing the strongest challenge in our study. Overall, our findings improve the understanding of the capabilities and limitations of current TKG models confronted with temporal distribution shifts.

TabPrep: Closing the Feature Engineering Gap in Tabular Benchmarks

Progress in tabular machine learning has largely focused on increasingly sophisticated model architectures. At the same time, feature engineering remains a critical yet underexplored component of real-world modeling pipelines that is entirely absent from modern benchmarks, which creates an unquantified evaluation gap. In this work, we introduce TabPrep, a lightweight preprocessing pipeline composed of feature generators that are carefully designed to target three specific structural data patterns. We show that many widely used model classes exhibit predictable blind spots to these patterns and that systematic feature engineering alone can establish new peak performance. Across the TabArena benchmark, integrating TabPrep into model training and tuning consistently improves performance for tree-based, neural, linear, and foundation models, often surpassing gains achieved by model-centric innovations alone. TabPrep outperforms previous automated feature engineering approaches in performance, efficiency, and applicability across datasets, enabling integration into large-scale benchmarks. By releasing TabPrep (see https://github.com/atschalz/tabprep), we enable researchers to integrate feature engineering into their benchmarking setup, filling a longstanding gap in tabular evaluations.

CountTRuCoLa: Rule Confidence Learning for Temporal Knowledge Graph Forecasting

We address the task of temporal knowledge graph (TKG) forecasting by introducing a fully explainable method based on temporal rules. Motivated by recent work proposing a strong baseline using recurrent facts, our approach learns four simple types of rules with a confidence function that considers both recency and frequency. Evaluated on nine datasets, our method matches or surpasses the performance of eight state-of-the-art models and two baselines, while providing fully interpretable predictions.

A Divide-and-Conquer Approach for Modeling Arrival Times in Business Process Simulation

Business Process Simulation (BPS) is a critical tool for analyzing and improving organizational processes by estimating the impact of process changes. A key component of BPS is the case-arrival model, which determines the pattern of new case entries into a process. Although accurate case-arrival modeling is essential for reliable simulations, as it influences waiting and overall cycle times, existing approaches often rely on oversimplified static distributions of inter-arrival times. These approaches fail to capture the dynamic and temporal complexities inherent in organizational environments, leading to less accurate and reliable outcomes. To address this limitation, we propose Auto Time Kernel Density Estimation (AT-KDE), a divide-and-conquer approach that models arrival times of processes by incorporating global dynamics, day-of-week variations, and intraday distributional changes, ensuring both precision and scalability. Experiments conducted across 20 diverse processes demonstrate that AT-KDE is far more accurate and robust than existing approaches while maintaining sensible execution time efficiency.

Rethinking BPS: A Utility-Based Evaluation Framework

Business process simulation (BPS) is a key tool for analyzing and optimizing organizational workflows, supporting decision-making by estimating the impact of process changes. The reliability of such estimates depends on the ability of a BPS model to accurately mimic the process under analysis, making rigorous accuracy evaluation essential. However, the state-of-the-art approach to evaluating BPS models has two key limitations. First, it treats simulation as a forecasting problem, testing whether models can predict unseen future events. This fails to assess how well a model captures the as-is process, particularly when process behavior changes from train to test period. Thus, it becomes difficult to determine whether poor results stem from an inaccurate model or the inherent complexity of the data, such as unpredictable drift. Second, the evaluation approach strongly relies on Earth Mover's Distance-based metrics, which can obscure temporal patterns and thus yield misleading conclusions about simulation quality. To address these issues, we propose a novel framework that evaluates simulation quality based on its ability to generate representative process behavior. Instead of comparing simulated logs to future real-world executions, we evaluate whether predictive process monitoring models trained on simulated data perform comparably to those trained on real data for downstream analysis tasks. Empirical results show that our framework not only helps identify sources of discrepancies but also distinguishes between model accuracy and data complexity, offering a more meaningful way to assess BPS quality.

Unreflected Use of Tabular Data Repositories Can Undermine Research Quality

Data repositories have accumulated a large number of tabular datasets from various domains. Machine Learning researchers are actively using these datasets to evaluate novel approaches. Consequently, data repositories have an important standing in tabular data research. They not only host datasets but also provide information on how to use them in supervised learning tasks. In this paper, we argue that, despite great achievements in usability, the unreflected usage of datasets from data repositories may have led to reduced research quality and scientific rigor. We present examples from prominent recent studies that illustrate the problematic use of datasets from OpenML, a large data repository for tabular data. Our illustrations help users of data repositories avoid falling into the traps of (1) using suboptimal model selection strategies, (2) overlooking strong baselines, and (3) inappropriate preprocessing. In response, we discuss possible solutions for how data repositories can prevent the inappropriate use of datasets and become the cornerstones for improved overall quality of empirical research studies.

A*Net and NBFNet Learn Negative Patterns on Knowledge Graphs

In this technical report, we investigate the predictive performance differences of a rule-based approach and the GNN architectures NBFNet and A*Net with respect to knowledge graph completion. For the two most common benchmarks, we find that a substantial fraction of the performance difference can be explained by one unique negative pattern on each dataset that is hidden from the rule-based approach. Our findings add a unique perspective on the performance difference of different model classes for knowledge graph completion: Models can achieve a predictive performance advantage by penalizing scores of incorrect facts opposed to providing high scores for correct facts.

Reevaluation of Inductive Link Prediction

Within this paper, we show that the evaluation protocol currently used for inductive link prediction is heavily flawed as it relies on ranking the true entity in a small set of randomly sampled negative entities. Due to the limited size of the set of negatives, a simple rule-based baseline can achieve state-of-the-art results, which simply ranks entities higher based on the validity of their type. As a consequence of these insights, we reevaluate current approaches for inductive link prediction on several benchmarks using the link prediction protocol usually applied to the transductive setting. As some inductive methods suffer from scalability issues when evaluated in this setting, we propose and apply additionally an improved sampling protocol, which does not suffer from the problem mentioned above. The results of our evaluation differ drastically from the results reported in so far.