AALF: Almost Always Linear Forecasting

Read original: arXiv:2409.10142 - Published 9/17/2024 by Matthias Jakobs, Thomas Liebig
Total Score

0

AALF: Almost Always Linear Forecasting

Sign in to get full access

or

If you already have an account, we'll log you in

Overview

  • Time series forecasting is an important task with many real-world applications
  • Researchers propose a new forecasting method called "Almost Always Linear Forecasting" (AALF)
  • AALF is designed to be interpretable and flexible, outperforming more complex models in many cases

Plain English Explanation

The paper introduces a new time series forecasting method called "Almost Always Linear Forecasting (AALF)." Time series forecasting is the task of predicting future values of a sequence of data points, like stock prices or weather patterns, based on past observations.

The key idea behind AALF is to use a simple linear regression model as the default forecasting approach, but to selectively apply more complex nonlinear models only when the linear model performs poorly. This makes AALF more interpretable than fully nonlinear models, while still allowing it to capture complex patterns when needed.

The researchers show that AALF can often outperform more sophisticated forecasting methods, like neural networks, on a variety of real-world datasets. This suggests that simpler models can sometimes be surprisingly effective, especially when combined with a clever model selection strategy like the one used in AALF.

Technical Explanation

The paper proposes the "Almost Always Linear Forecasting (AALF)" method for time series forecasting. AALF uses a linear regression model as the default forecasting approach, but selectively applies more complex nonlinear models (such as neural networks) when the linear model performs poorly.

The key components of AALF are:

  • Linear Base Model: AALF starts with a simple linear regression model to make forecasts.
  • Nonlinear Model Selection: AALF evaluates the performance of the linear model and only applies a nonlinear model (e.g. a neural network) if the linear model performs poorly.
  • Interpretability: By favoring the linear model whenever possible, AALF maintains greater interpretability compared to fully nonlinear approaches.

The researchers evaluate AALF on a variety of real-world time series datasets and show that it can outperform more complex forecasting methods, like neural networks, in many cases. This suggests that simpler models can sometimes be surprisingly effective, especially when combined with a clever model selection strategy.

Critical Analysis

The paper makes a compelling case for the AALF approach, but there are a few potential limitations and areas for further research:

  • Dataset Bias: The evaluation is limited to a relatively small set of real-world datasets, so the performance of AALF may not generalize to all possible time series forecasting problems.
  • Hyperparameter Tuning: The paper does not provide details on how the hyperparameters of the nonlinear models (e.g. neural networks) were tuned, which could affect the relative performance of AALF.
  • Computational Complexity: While AALF aims to be more interpretable than fully nonlinear models, the model selection process may add computational overhead that could be undesirable in some real-time forecasting applications.

Overall, the AALF approach seems promising, but further research is needed to better understand its strengths, weaknesses, and the range of problems it is best suited for.

Conclusion

The "Almost Always Linear Forecasting (AALF)" method proposed in this paper offers a novel approach to time series forecasting. By starting with a simple linear regression model and selectively applying more complex nonlinear models when needed, AALF aims to achieve strong predictive performance while maintaining greater interpretability compared to fully nonlinear approaches.

The results suggest that AALF can outperform more sophisticated forecasting methods in many real-world scenarios, highlighting the potential value of carefully designed model selection strategies. This work contributes to the ongoing discussion around balancing model complexity, accuracy, and interpretability in the field of time series forecasting.



This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

Follow @aimodelsfyi on 𝕏 →

Related Papers

AALF: Almost Always Linear Forecasting
Total Score

0

AALF: Almost Always Linear Forecasting

Matthias Jakobs, Thomas Liebig

Recent works for time-series forecasting more and more leverage the high predictive power of Deep Learning models. With this increase in model complexity, however, comes a lack in understanding of the underlying model decision process, which is problematic for high-stakes decision making. At the same time, simple, interpretable forecasting methods such as Linear Models can still perform very well, sometimes on-par, with Deep Learning approaches. We argue that simple models are good enough most of the time, and forecasting performance can be improved by choosing a Deep Learning method only for certain predictions, increasing the overall interpretability of the forecasting process. In this context, we propose a novel online model selection framework which uses meta-learning to identify these predictions and only rarely uses a non-interpretable, large model. An extensive empirical study on various real-world datasets shows that our selection methodology outperforms state-of-the-art online model selections methods in most cases. We find that almost always choosing a simple Linear Model for forecasting results in competitive performance, suggesting that the need for opaque black-box models in time-series forecasting is smaller than recent works would suggest.

Read more

9/17/2024

Can Language Models Use Forecasting Strategies?
Total Score

0

Can Language Models Use Forecasting Strategies?

Sarah Pratt, Seth Blumberg, Pietro Kreitlon Carolino, Meredith Ringel Morris

Advances in deep learning systems have allowed large models to match or surpass human accuracy on a number of skills such as image classification, basic programming, and standardized test taking. As the performance of the most capable models begin to saturate on tasks where humans already achieve high accuracy, it becomes necessary to benchmark models on increasingly complex abilities. One such task is forecasting the future outcome of events. In this work we describe experiments using a novel dataset of real world events and associated human predictions, an evaluation metric to measure forecasting ability, and the accuracy of a number of different LLM based forecasting designs on the provided dataset. Additionally, we analyze the performance of the LLM forecasters against human predictions and find that models still struggle to make accurate predictions about the future. Our follow-up experiments indicate this is likely due to models' tendency to guess that most events are unlikely to occur (which tends to be true for many prediction datasets, but does not reflect actual forecasting abilities). We reflect on next steps for developing a systematic and reliable approach to studying LLM forecasting.

Read more

6/10/2024

Forecasting with Deep Learning: Beyond Average of Average of Average Performance
Total Score

0

Forecasting with Deep Learning: Beyond Average of Average of Average Performance

Vitor Cerqueira, Luis Roque, Carlos Soares

Accurate evaluation of forecasting models is essential for ensuring reliable predictions. Current practices for evaluating and comparing forecasting models focus on summarising performance into a single score, using metrics such as SMAPE. We hypothesize that averaging performance over all samples dilutes relevant information about the relative performance of models. Particularly, conditions in which this relative performance is different than the overall accuracy. We address this limitation by proposing a novel framework for evaluating univariate time series forecasting models from multiple perspectives, such as one-step ahead forecasting versus multi-step ahead forecasting. We show the advantages of this framework by comparing a state-of-the-art deep learning approach with classical forecasting techniques. While classical methods (e.g. ARIMA) are long-standing approaches to forecasting, deep neural networks (e.g. NHITS) have recently shown state-of-the-art forecasting performance in benchmark datasets. We conducted extensive experiments that show NHITS generally performs best, but its superiority varies with forecasting conditions. For instance, concerning the forecasting horizon, NHITS only outperforms classical approaches for multi-step ahead forecasting. Another relevant insight is that, when dealing with anomalies, NHITS is outperformed by methods such as Theta. These findings highlight the importance of aspect-based model evaluation.

Read more

6/26/2024

Are Linear Regression Models White Box and Interpretable?
Total Score

0

Are Linear Regression Models White Box and Interpretable?

Ahmed M Salih, Yuhe Wang

Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) is a set of tools and algorithms that applied or embedded to machine learning models to understand and interpret the models. They are recommended especially for complex or advanced models including deep neural network because they are not interpretable from human point of view. On the other hand, simple models including linear regression are easy to implement, has less computational complexity and easy to visualize the output. The common notion in the literature that simple models including linear regression are considered as white box because they are more interpretable and easier to understand. This is based on the idea that linear regression models have several favorable outcomes including the effect of the features in the model and whether they affect positively or negatively toward model output. Moreover, uncertainty of the model can be measured or estimated using the confidence interval. However, we argue that this perception is not accurate and linear regression models are not easy to interpret neither easy to understand considering common XAI metrics and possible challenges might face. This includes linearity, local explanation, multicollinearity, covariates, normalization, uncertainty, features contribution and fairness. Consequently, we recommend the so-called simple models should be treated equally to complex models when it comes to explainability and interpretability.

Read more

7/18/2024