Sari la conținut

Română · beta. Traducerea a fost făcută automat și este încă în curs de revizuire. Citește pagina în engleză

perspectiva aiqbenchMachine learning

analiza aiqbench

This study rigorously audits four recent test-time adaptation methods for time-series forecasting by enforcing strict causal delays between forecast labels and model updates, revealing that many claimed gains are artifacts of data leakage. The analysis demonstrates that simple linear correctors often outperform complex adapters in terms of both accuracy and computational cost, while highlighting significant performance degradation when label delays increase on high-drift datasets. Researchers should prioritize the released leakage-free harness to benchmark future adaptation techniques against these robust baselines.
Sursă care acoperăarXiv
Ce este aceastaLectura unui model asupra articolului și a acoperirii conexe, scrisă pentru aiqbench. Nu sunt cuvintele publicației.

Training on the Future: A Delay-Aware Audit of Test-Time Adaptation for Time-Series Forecasting

arXiv4 min de cititArticolul și perspectiva sunt în engleză.

arXiv:2610.12232v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Test-time adaptation (TTA) methods for time-series forecasting update a deployed model, or a small adapter around it, from incoming ground truth. But the label of an $H$-step forecast exists only $H$ steps later, and real data pipelines add further delay. We build a leakage-free harness in which the label of forecast origin $s$ is released for updates only at step $s+d$ with $d \ge H$, and enforce this rule inside the released code of four recent TTA methods (TAFAS, COSA, PETSA and DynaTTA), run on their own backbones and checkpoints across five benchmarks (ETTm1, ETTh2, Weather, Electricity and Traffic). As references we add two closed-form correctors: a bank of recursive least squares (RLS) filters combined by a per-coordinate median, with no tunable hyperparameters and 56 microseconds per step on the 7-channel streams, and an ELF-style linear corrector. Under causal delayed labels the picture is asymmetric. On ETTm1 every audited method genuinely adapts, yet the RLS bank still beats three of the four at a fraction of their cost; only DynaTTA beats the bank, only at the minimum causal delay, and at roughly 2,500 times the per-update cost; the ELF-style corrector beats all four. On the other four datasets, the largest statistically significant improvement any published method achieves over its own frozen checkpoint is half a percent, on all four at least one published method is significantly worse than the frozen model at the minimum causal delay, and on drift-heavy ETTh2 longer label delays make every adapter that separates from the frozen model, ours included, significantly harmful. Leaky next-step updates inflate the apparent gains of simple adapters by up to 110%, and the backbone training recipe moves frozen online error by up to a factor of 25, more than any adaptation effect we measure. We release the harness, integration patches and all cached runs.

Abstract:Test-time adaptation (TTA) methods for time-series forecasting update a deployed model, or a small adapter around it, from incoming ground truth. But the label of an $H$-step forecast exists only $H$ steps later, and real data pipelines add further delay. We build a leakage-free harness in which the label of forecast origin $s$ is released for updates only at step $s+d$ with $d \ge H$, and enforce this rule inside the released code of four recent TTA methods (TAFAS, COSA, PETSA and DynaTTA), run on their own backbones and checkpoints across five benchmarks (ETTm1, ETTh2, Weather, Electricity and Traffic). As references we add two closed-form correctors: a bank of recursive least squares (RLS) filters combined by a per-coordinate median, with no tunable hyperparameters and 56 microseconds per step on the 7-channel streams, and an ELF-style linear corrector. Under causal delayed labels the picture is asymmetric. On ETTm1 every audited method genuinely adapts, yet the RLS bank still beats three of the four at a fraction of their cost; only DynaTTA beats the bank, only at the minimum causal delay, and at roughly 2,500 times the per-update cost; the ELF-style corrector beats all four. On the other four datasets, the largest statistically significant improvement any published method achieves over its own frozen checkpoint is half a percent, on all four at least one published method is significantly worse than the frozen model at the minimum causal delay, and on drift-heavy ETTh2 longer label delays make every adapter that separates from the frozen model, ours included, significantly harmful. Leaky next-step updates inflate the apparent gains of simple adapters by up to 110%, and the backbone training recipe moves frozen online error by up to a factor of 25, more than any adaptation effect we measure. We release the harness, integration patches and all cached runs.

34 pages, 9 figures. Code and cached results: this https URL

Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2610.12232 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2610.12232v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.12232 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 · 408 cuvinte

Subiecte conexe