PuSH - Publication Server of Helmholtz Zentrum München: Data-centric benchmarking of neural network architectures for the univariate time series forecasting task.

Information

Clues to quality of journals

Open Access Policy of Helmholtz Association 2016

CC Licencences

Publication Metrics

Navigation

Home

Deutsch

EVA: Electronic Publishing

New EVA Application

Research

Advanced Search

Browse by ...

... HMGU-Authors/Consortia

... Organizational Structure

... Journal

... Publication Type

... Research Data

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Publication Year

Publication overview

Statistics

Statistics (last 5 years)

OA Publications

Publish

Submit Publication

Import publication from...

...EVA

Report missing publication

Highlights

Support & Contact

Contact persons

Help

Data protection

Helmholtz Open Science

JANE Journal Estimator

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)

Publ. Version/Full Text

DOI

	Open Access Gold

Abstract
Metrics
Extra information

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