Structural Inflation
14.8 vs 10.6 nodes
4.4 vs 3.2 depth
EML grammars produce systematically larger and deeper trees.
Rejection Dynamics
75.2% depth rejection
85.9% aggregate (EML)
Depth rejection dominates — structural inflation is the primary bottleneck.
Exact Recovery Rate
44.4% EML
33.3% baseline
8/18 vs 6/18 exact recoveries (MSE < 1e-10).
Loading executive summary...
Raw Data
| File | Description | Action |
|---|---|---|
| symbolic_regression_per_target.csv | Per-target SR results with rejection metrics | View ↗ |
| depth_vs_error.csv | Tree depth and MSE per target × grammar | View ↗ |
| size_vs_error.csv | Node count and MSE per target × grammar | View ↗ |
| domain_ablation.csv | Per-expression transform outcomes (strict vs relaxed) | View ↗ |
| success_rates.csv | Exact recovery counts and success rates | View ↗ |
| summary.md | Full results summary (Markdown) | View Raw ↗ |