Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Simple Feedfoward Neural Networks are Almost All You Need for Time Series Forecasting

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2503.23621 v1 pith:F5NBJIZO submitted 2025-03-30 cs.LG

Simple Feedfoward Neural Networks are Almost All You Need for Time Series Forecasting

classification cs.LG
keywords seriestimeforecastingnetworksneuralsfnnsalmostalways
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Time series data are everywhere -- from finance to healthcare -- and each domain brings its own unique complexities and structures. While advanced models like Transformers and graph neural networks (GNNs) have gained popularity in time series forecasting, largely due to their success in tasks like language modeling, their added complexity is not always necessary. In our work, we show that simple feedforward neural networks (SFNNs) can achieve performance on par with, or even exceeding, these state-of-the-art models, while being simpler, smaller, faster, and more robust. Our analysis indicates that, in many cases, univariate SFNNs are sufficient, implying that modeling interactions between multiple series may offer only marginal benefits. Even when inter-series relationships are strong, a basic multivariate SFNN still delivers competitive results. We also examine some key design choices and offer guidelines on making informed decisions. Additionally, we critique existing benchmarking practices and propose an improved evaluation protocol. Although SFNNs may not be optimal for every situation (hence the ``almost'' in our title) they serve as a strong baseline that future time series forecasting methods should always be compared against.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.