Overcoming data limitations in internet traffic forecasting: LSTM models with transfer learning and wavelet augmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate internet traffic prediction in smaller ISP networks is challenged by limited data availability. This paper explores this issue using transfer learning and data augmentation techniques with two LSTM-based models, LSTMSeq2Seq and LSTMSeq2SeqAtn, initially trained on a comprehensive dataset provided by Juniper Networks, Inc. and subsequently applied to smaller datasets. The datasets represent real internet traffic telemetry, offering insights into diverse traffic patterns across different network domains. Our study found that although both models performed well in single-step predictions, multi-step forecasting was more challenging, especially regarding long-term accuracy. Empirical results demonstrated that LSTMSeq2Seq outperformed LSTMSeq2SeqAtn on smaller datasets, with improvements in forecasting accuracy by up to 36.70% in MAE and 27.66% in WAPE after applying data augmentation using Discrete Wavelet Transform. The LSTMSeq2Seq model achieved an accuracy improvement from 83% to 88% for 6-step forecasts, 82% to 88% for 9-step forecasts, and 81% to 87% for 12-step forecasts, whereas LSTMSeq2SeqAtn exhibited a more stable short-term performance but higher variability in longer forecasts. Additionally, the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) of multi-step predictions increased over longer horizons, with LSTMSeq2Seq reaching 6.74% at 12 steps and LSTMSeq2SeqAtn at 6.77%, highlighting the challenge of long-term forecasting. Variability analysis showed that while the attention mechanism in LSTMSeq2SeqAtn improved short-term prediction consistency, it also increased uncertainty in longer forecasts, as seen in the interquartile range (IQR) rising from 0.578 at 6 steps to 1.237 at 9 steps. Outlier analysis further confirmed that LSTMSeq2Seq exhibited more stable improvements, whereas LSTMSeq2SeqAtn showed increased dispersion in forecast accuracy. These findings underscore the importance of transfer learning and data augmentation in enhancing forecasting accuracy, particularly for smaller ISP networks with limited data availability. Furthermore, our analysis highlights the trade-offs between model complexity, short-term consistency, and long-term stability in internet traffic prediction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".