analiza aiqbench
This research proposes a post-hoc correction framework designed to prevent performance degradation in frozen foundation models when outcomes are delayed or revised. By combining static and online correctors on the simplex, the method achieves significant gains while strictly enforcing downside control across multiple benchmarks and European load forecasting tasks. The study highlights critical empirical conditions regarding expert speed and outcome alignment that determine the method's effective scope.
Downside-Controlled Online Forecast Combination under Delayed and Revised Outcomes
arXiv:2609.29096v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Post-hoc correction adjusts a forecaster that cannot be retrained, such as a foundation model, but a correction fitted where errors are stable can hurt where they shift. We aim for downside control: not much worse than the starting forecast. We combine the frozen forecaster, a static corrector and an online corrector on the simplex, using only losses that mature after the horizon. Across seven benchmarks and four base models, two of them foundation models, the worst deterioration over 28 pairs at the main horizon is 0.15% and gains reach 11.5%. On day-ahead load for seven European bidding zones it lowers mean MSE in all seven zones, while single correctors raise mean MSE by up to 102% where the published forecast is most accurate. Three empirical conditions on expert speed, stream length and outcome alignment, each fixed by a documented failure, delimit its scope. Learning from the provisional outcome improves four zones on the settled one; learning on the settled outcome restores all seven.
Abstract:Post-hoc correction adjusts a forecaster that cannot be retrained, such as a foundation model, but a correction fitted where errors are stable can hurt where they shift. We aim for downside control: not much worse than the starting forecast. We combine the frozen forecaster, a static corrector and an online corrector on the simplex, using only losses that mature after the horizon. Across seven benchmarks and four base models, two of them foundation models, the worst deterioration over 28 pairs at the main horizon is 0.15% and gains reach 11.5%. On day-ahead load for seven European bidding zones it lowers mean MSE in all seven zones, while single correctors raise mean MSE by up to 102% where the published forecast is most accurate. Three empirical conditions on expert speed, stream length and outcome alignment, each fixed by a documented failure, delimit its scope. Learning from the provisional outcome improves four zones on the settled one; learning on the settled outcome restores all seven.
Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2609.29096 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2609.29096v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.29096 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 257 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Vertical Advantage: Transforming Industries with Lakebase and Agentic AI
Databricks · 27 aug. 2026

The Entangled Dimensions of Decision Theory
LessWrong · 30 iul. 2026

Brief independent investigation of agents’ behavior, reasoning and collaboration in the OpenAI / Hugging Face hacking incident
METR · 26 aug. 2026

A Candid Abacus AI Review: The All-in-One AI Platform for Professionals & Enterprises
KDnuggets · 10 sept. 2026