MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7155648237 · doi:10.1145/3789418.3789439

Interpretable Forecasting in Multivariate Time Series Using Koopman Autoencoder and Fuzzy Transform

2025· article· W7155648237 on OpenAlexaff
Vishwambhar Pathak, Jong-Kyou Kim, Prabhat Mahanti

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsSaint John Regional HospitalUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretabilityAutoencoderEmbeddingPattern recognition (psychology)Curse of dimensionalityMultivariate statisticsRobustness (evolution)Time series

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the modeling efficacy of Koopman Autoencoder (KAE) in comparison with LSTM, GRU, and Transformer architectures for multivariate time series (MTS) prediction tasks. We additionally evaluate the effect of fuzzy logic-based feature transformations (triangular and Gaussian membership functions) on learning dynamics and predictive performance. Synthetic MTS data comprising 16 channels with varying levels of additive Gaussian noise (0.0 and 0.1) are used to simulate realistic conditions. Experiments are conducted both with fuzzy-transformed inputs and raw features to assess comparative robustness. Results indicate that Transformers with triangular fuzzy transformation achieved the best predictive accuracy. Quantitative results show that fuzzy-transformed inputs significantly reduce prediction error across all models, with Transformer achieving the best MSE (0.0516) and R² (0.043) under triangular F-transform. PCA and t-SNE visualizations affirmed the distinct latent separability of Transformer and LSTM embeddings. While KAE yielded slightly lower predictive performance (MSE > 0.06), KAE embedding demonstrated advantages in latent space linearized embedding with more compressed, interpretability via saliency maps, and robustness to structured signal evolution. The results suggest KAE with fuzzy-transformed features offers a promising trade-off between interpretability and performance for explainable AI in time series feature embedding and forecasting.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207