CNN-TFT explained by SHAP with multi-head attention weights for time series forecasting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and transformer architectures offer strengths for modeling temporal data: CNNs excel at capturing local patterns and translational invariances, while transformers effectively model long-range dependencies via self-attention. This paper proposes a hybrid architecture integrating convolutional feature extraction with a temporal fusion transformer (TFT) backbone to enhance multivariate time series forecasting. The CNN module first applies a hierarchy of one-dimensional convolutional layers to distill salient local patterns from raw input sequences, reducing noise and dimensionality. The resulting feature maps are then fed into the TFT, which applies multi-head attention to capture both short- and long-term dependencies and to weigh relevant covariates adaptively. We evaluate the CNN-TFT on a hydroelectric natural flow time series dataset. Experimental results demonstrate that CNN-TFT outperforms well-established deep learning models, with a mean absolute percentage error of up to 2.2%. The explainability of the model is obtained by a proposed Shapley additive explanations with multi-head attention weights (SHAP-MHAW). Our novel architecture, named CNN-TFT-SHAP-MHAW, is promising for applications requiring high-fidelity, multivariate time series forecasts, being available for future analysis at https://github.com/SFStefenon/CNN-TFT-SHAP-MHAW .
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".