SPEAR: Soft Prompt Enhanced Anomaly Recognition for Time Series Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Time series anomaly detection plays a crucial role in a wide range of fields, such as healthcare and internet traffic monitoring. The emergence of large language models (LLMs) offers new opportunities for detecting anomalies in the ubiquitous time series data. Traditional approaches struggle with variable-length time series sequences and context-based anomalies. We propose Soft Prompt Enhanced Anomaly Recognition (SPEAR), a novel approach to leverage LLMs for anomaly detection with soft prompts and quantization. Our methodology involves quantizing and transforming the time series data into input embeddings and combining them with learnable soft prompt embeddings. These combined embeddings are then fed into a frozen LLM. The soft prompts are updated iteratively based on a cross-entropy loss, allowing the model to adapt to time series anomaly detection. The use of soft prompts helps adapt LLMs effectively to time series tasks, while quantization ensures optimal handling of sequences, as LLMs are designed to handle discrete sequences. Our experimental results demonstrate that soft prompts effectively increase LLMs’ performance in downstream tasks regarding time series anomaly detection.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".