PuSH - Publikationsserver des Helmholtz Zentrums München: Data-centric benchmarking of neural network architectures for the univariate time series forecasting task.

Informationen

Hinweise zu Qualitätskriterien von Zeitschriften

Open-Access-Richtlinie der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft 2016

CC Licencences

Metriken für Publikationen

Navigation

Startseite

English

EVA: Veröffentlichen

Neuer EVA Antrag

Recherche

Erweiterte Suche

Durchblättern nach ...

... HMGU-Autoren/Konsortien

... Organisationsstruktur

... Zeitschriften

... Publikationstypen

... Forschungsdaten

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Erscheinungsjahr

Publikationen im Überblick

Statistik

HGF Fortschrittsbericht

OA Publikationen

Eintragen

Neue Publikation eintragen

Neue Publikation holen aus...

...EVA

Fehlende Publikation melden

Highlights

Suche

Hilfe & Kontakt

Ansprechpartner

Hilfe

Datenschutz

Helmholtz Open Science

Bibliometrische Indikatoren

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Schlieper, P.* ; Dombrowski, M.* ; Nguyen, A.* ; Zanca, D.* ; Eskofier, B.M.

Data-centric benchmarking of neural network architectures for the univariate time series forecasting task.

Forecasting 6, 718-747 (2024)

Verlagsversion

DOI

	Open Access Gold

Abstract
Metriken
Zusatzinfos

Time series forecasting has witnessed a rapid proliferation of novel neural network approaches in recent times. However, performances in terms of benchmarking results are generally not consistent, and it is complicated to determine in which cases one approach fits better than another. Therefore, we propose adopting a data-centric perspective for benchmarking neural network architectures on time series forecasting by generating ad hoc synthetic datasets. In particular, we combine sinusoidal functions to synthesize univariate time series data for multi-input-multi-output prediction tasks. We compare the most popular architectures for time series, namely long short-term memory (LSTM) networks, convolutional neural networks (CNNs), and transformers, and directly connect their performance with different controlled data characteristics, such as the sequence length, noise and frequency, and delay length. Our findings suggest that transformers are the best architecture for dealing with different delay lengths. In contrast, for different noise and frequency levels and different sequence lengths, LSTM is the best-performing architecture by a significant amount. Based on our insights, we derive recommendations which allow machine learning (ML) practitioners to decide which architecture to apply, given the dataset’s characteristics.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Altmetric

2.300

0.830