Pith. sign in

REVIEW 9 cited by

TimeSeriesExam: A time series understanding exam

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 2410.14752 v1 pith:ORMNM27O submitted 2024-10-18 cs.AI cs.CL

TimeSeriesExam: A time series understanding exam

classification cs.AI cs.CL
keywords seriestimemodelsabilityllmstimeseriesexamunderstandunderstanding
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated a remarkable ability to model time series data. These capabilities can be partly explained if LLMs understand basic time series concepts. However, our knowledge of what these models understand about time series data remains relatively limited. To address this gap, we introduce TimeSeriesExam, a configurable and scalable multiple-choice question exam designed to assess LLMs across five core time series understanding categories: pattern recognition, noise understanding, similarity analysis, anomaly detection, and causality analysis. TimeSeriesExam comprises of over 700 questions, procedurally generated using 104 carefully curated templates and iteratively refined to balance difficulty and their ability to discriminate good from bad models. We test 7 state-of-the-art LLMs on the TimeSeriesExam and provide the first comprehensive evaluation of their time series understanding abilities. Our results suggest that closed-source models such as GPT-4 and Gemini understand simple time series concepts significantly better than their open-source counterparts, while all models struggle with complex concepts such as causality analysis. We believe that the ability to programatically generate questions is fundamental to assessing and improving LLM's ability to understand and reason about time series data.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 9 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. LLaTiSA: Towards Difficulty-Stratified Time Series Reasoning from Visual Perception to Semantics

    cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    LLaTiSA is a vision-language model trained on a new 83k-sample hierarchical time series reasoning dataset that shows superior performance and out-of-distribution generalization on stratified TSR tasks.

  2. HEARTS: Benchmarking LLM Reasoning on Health Time Series

    cs.LG 2026-02 conditional novelty 7.0

    A 110-task benchmark across 20 health signal modalities shows current LLMs underperform specialized models and depend on simple heuristics rather than robust time-series reasoning.

  3. TS-Haystack: A Multi-Task Retrieval Benchmark for Long-Context Time-Series Reasoning

    cs.LG 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    TS-Haystack benchmark shows time-series language models degrade sharply on long contexts while an agentic retrieval system using classifier tools matches or beats them on 9 of 10 tasks.

  4. TS-Agent: Understanding and Reasoning Over Raw Time Series via Iterative Insight Gathering

    cs.AI 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    TS-Agent is an agentic framework that uses LLMs only for evidence-based reasoning while delegating extraction to raw time series tools, matching or exceeding baselines on four benchmarks with largest gains on reasoning tasks.

  5. TS-Reasoner: Domain-Oriented Time Series Inference Agents for Reasoning and Automated Analysis

    cs.LG 2024-10 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    TS-Reasoner is a domain-oriented agent using LLMs, computational tools, and error feedback for multi-step time series inference, showing better performance than general LLMs on understanding and reasoning benchmarks.

  6. CLIR-Bench: Benchmarking Multimodal Question Answering over Irregular Clinical Time Series

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    CLIR-Bench shows generalist and time-series LLMs struggle to ground clinical answers in sparse irregular ICU evidence, with top accuracy near 50% and weak causal evidence use.

  7. TSQAgent: Rating Time Series Data Quality via Dedicated Agentic Reasoning

    cs.AI 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    TSQAgent uses three collaborative LLM agents with analytical tools to identify relevant quality dimensions and enable quantitative comparisons for time series data, improving on standard LLM methods and leading to bet...

  8. TS-Haystack: A Multi-Task Retrieval Benchmark for Long-Context Time-Series Reasoning

    cs.LG 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0

    Time-series language models lose the ability to locate specific events as context length grows, even while whole-window classification improves.

  9. From Time Series Analysis to Question Answering: A Survey in the LLM Era

    cs.LG 2025-06 accept novelty 6.0

    A survey proposing a taxonomy of Injective, Bridging, and Internal Alignment paradigms to evolve TSA into user-driven Time Series Question Answering with LLMs.