MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On the Performance of Legendre State-Space Models in Short-Term Time Series Forecasting

2023· article· en· W4388207260 on OpenAlexaff
Elise Zhang, Di Wu, Benoît Boulet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerm (time)Series (stratigraphy)Legendre polynomialsState spaceComputer scienceTime seriesState (computer science)Applied mathematicsMathematicsAlgorithmPhysicsMathematical analysisMachine learningStatisticsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

State-space models (SSMs) are a class of fundamental models in control theory. SSMs are well-known for their concise mathematical representations and capability of capturing the evolving dynamics of systems. They have also proven useful in time series modeling. Recent studies suggest that SSMs are able to conceptually generalize to classic machine learning models (CNNs, RNNs and RNN-variants) as well as provide theoretical justification for the design of novel sequence models. In this work, we investigate one type of SSM, the Legendre Memory Unit (LMU) and LMU’s parallelized variant (LMUFFT), and propose a stacking strategy leveraging the LMUFFT backbone and a Deep Adaptive Input Normalization (DAIN) scheme. Model performance is evaluated using short-term time series forecasting tasks formulated from real-world data. The proposed structure outperforms the traditional machine learning models in efficiency and prediction capability. Our results also suggest that this family of state-space models has potential in the realm of machine learning research. By shedding light on the benefits of SSMs in short-term time series forecasting, we hope to pique the interest of machine learning researchers in the use of SSMs and inspire further investigation into novel model designs based on these models.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.188
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.183 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207