Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 113 references

Breaking Silos: Adaptive Model Fusion Unlocks Better Time Series Forecasting

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read TimeFuse claims that no single forecasting model wins on every sample, and that a simple per-sample linear fusion of 13 models, guided by 24 meta-features, outperforms the best individual model on up to 95.1% of test samples across long…

desk verdict A solid, useful empirical paper on sample-level gating for heterogeneous forecasters—old idea, clean execution, with the meta-feature sufficiency assumption left untested. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.18442 v1 pith:YZNRR5V2 submitted 2025-05-24 cs.LG cs.AI

Zhining Liu , Ze Yang , Xiao Lin , Ruizhong Qiu , Tianxin Wei , Yada Zhu , Hendrik Hamann , Jingrui He
show 1 more author
Hanghang Tong
This is my paper
classification cs.LGcs.AI
keywords timeseriesforecastingmodelensembleadaptivefusionmeta-featureszero-shotgeneralizationsample-levelanalysis
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that no single state-of-the-art forecasting model wins on every test sample; each model tops a notable fraction of samples. It introduces TimeFuse, a framework that fuses a zoo of 13 heterogeneous models by learning per-input weights from a 24-dimensional meta-feature description of the input series. The fusor is a single-layer linear network trained on validation data across tasks, and it delivers near-universal gains: better than the best individual model on up to 95.1% of samples, with average MSE reductions of 3.61%–11.77% over top baselines on long-term benchmarks. The significance is that better forecasting can come from combining existing models adaptively rather than designing a new architecture. TimeFuse also beats static ensembles and shows zero-shot transfer to datasets never seen in meta-training.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the fusor: a softmax-normalized single-layer linear network that maps a 24-dimensional meta-feature vector to weights over the k base models, with the fused output being the weighted sum of base model predictions. The meta-features are crafted from four families—statistical (mean, skewness, kurtosis), temporal (autocorrelation, stationarity, rate of change, AR(1) coefficients), spectral (dominant frequency, spectral entropy, spectral variation), and multivariate (covariance and cross-correlation statistics)—and the paper shows this 24-feature set matches the performance of a 165-variable feature set from a time-series feature extraction library. The fusor is trained with Huber loss on validation-set triplets (meta-features, base predictions, ground truth), decoupled from base model training, with batch-level mixing and oversampling across tasks to support cross-task and zero-shot generalization.

What would settle it

A concrete test: on a held-out set, find pairs of samples with nearly identical meta-feature vectors but different best base models. If such pairs are common, train a nonlinear fusor (or one with access to raw inputs) and show it beats the linear fusor on those pairs; that would refute the sufficiency of the 24-feature linear representation. The gap between TimeFuse and the oracle that always selects the best base model measures how much the meta-features leave on the table.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that sample-level adaptive fusion consistently outperforms the best single model across a wide range of forecasting tasks. On seven long-term benchmarks (ETT, Weather, Electricity, Traffic) and short-term benchmarks (PEMS, EPF), the fused forecast beats the task-specific best individual model consistently, with average MSE reductions of 3.61% relative to TimeXer, 6.88% relative to TimeMixer, 11.77% relative to PAttn, and 8.39% relative to iTransformer. On the PEMS traffic datasets the fused model reduces MAPE by roughly 10–20% over the top three individual models, and in zero-shot evaluation (fusor trained on all other datasets) it still outperforms the best individual model in most cases. The learned weights are interpretable, reflecting known model strengths: low-stationarity inputs are routed toward Non-stationary Transformer and spectrally complex inputs toward TimeMixer.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that carries the method is that the 24 hand-crafted meta-features capture everything needed to know which base model will be most accurate on a given input; since the fusor is linear, any two inputs with similar meta-feature vectors receive similar weights, so differences between samples that live outside this feature space are invisible to the fusion.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The fusor's accuracy improves monotonically as more diverse base models are added to the zoo, so the framework can absorb future model advances without re-architecting the fusion.
  • Static ensembles (mean or median over a validation-selected top-k) are consistently beaten, removing the need to pick an ensemble size per dataset.
  • Zero-shot fusion trained on other datasets still beats the best individual model in most cases, so a single fusor can serve new forecasting tasks without per-dataset training.
  • The learned fusion weights give a per-model diagnostic: they reveal which temporal properties each base model handles well, which could guide future model design.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the fusor is linear in 24 meta-features, a natural next test is whether a nonlinear fusor on the same features, or a fusor that sees raw inputs, closes the remaining gap to the oracle that always picks the best base model.
  • The validation-set dependence implies a concrete failure mode: if a deployment distribution shifts away from validation, the paper's own distribution-shift discussion suggests pruning or re-weighting models may be needed, and the framework could be paired with test-time adaptation.
  • The meta-feature descriptions are dataset-agnostic, so TimeFuse could act as a portable controller across heterogeneous forecasters, including statistical, neural, and foundation models, using the same 24-feature interface.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes TimeFuse, a framework for sample-level adaptive fusion of heterogeneous time-series forecasting models. Given a model zoo of independently trained base forecasters, TimeFuse extracts 24 hand-crafted meta-features from each input series and trains a linear fusor to output softmax weights over the base models, minimizing Huber loss on held-out validation predictions. The fusor is meta-trained jointly across datasets, enabling zero-shot application to unseen datasets. Experiments cover 16 benchmarks and 13 base models for long- and short-term forecasting, with ablations, efficiency measurements, comparisons to static ensembles and AutoML baselines, and a zero-shot evaluation. The main reported findings are that no single base model wins on all samples and that TimeFuse achieves near-universal improvements, with average MSE reductions of 3.61%–11.77% over top individual baselines.

Significance. If its claims hold, TimeFuse is a practically useful and conceptually clean contribution: it decouples fusor training from base-model training, is architecture-agnostic, interpretable through the learned weights, and inexpensive at inference time. The empirical study is extensive, including 16 datasets, 13 base models, ablations over feature groups, comparison with AutoGluon and a foundation model, and an explicit zero-shot protocol. The release of code is a further strength. The main risk is that the headline claims—'sample-level adaptive fusion', 'consistently outperforms', and 'near-universal improvement'—are not yet fully supported by the evidence as presented, because the paper lacks an oracle bound on the achievable fusion gain, reports no repeated runs or significance tests, and contains several results that are ties or losses (e.g., zero-shot on ETTm2).

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.1–3.2, Eq. (2)] The central claim of sample-level adaptive fusion is not directly supported, because the fusor is a linear function of the 24 hand-crafted meta-features and the paper never measures how much of the per-sample model ranking is recoverable from those features. Table 6 shows that each feature group contributes and that the 24-feature set roughly matches TSFEL's 165 features, but neither result establishes that the features capture which base model is best for a given sample. The absence of an oracle comparison (per-sample best base model or optimal fusion weights) leaves open the possibility that TimeFuse operates largely as a dataset-level or coarse ensemble rather than a genuinely sample-adaptive mechanism. I recommend adding an oracle upper bound and reporting rank-recovery statistics, such as agreement between fusor-selected models and the per-sample best model.
  2. [Section 4.1, Tables 2 and 5] Several headline improvements are within the noise of a single split, and at least one zero-shot result is a loss. In Table 2, ETTm2 MSE is 0.274 for TimeFuse, TimeXer, and TimeMixer, and Weather MSE is 0.240 versus 0.241; in Table 5, zero-shot TimeFuse on ETTm2 is worse than the best individual model on both MSE (0.1721 versus 0.1712) and MAE (0.2568 versus 0.2560). No repeated runs, confidence intervals, or paired significance tests are reported, so the claimed average reductions of 3.61%–11.77% and the statement that TimeFuse consistently outperforms individual models are not statistically grounded. Please add multi-seed results with variance and, where appropriate, paired tests over test samples.
  3. [Appendix D and Section 3.2] The limitation discussion concedes that models that are strong on the meta-training (validation) set but weak on the test set can hurt fusion, and that excluding such models can improve results. This is directly relevant to the zero-shot generalization claim, which rests on the transferability of the validation-to-test mapping. Because the fusor is trained on validation loss and applied at test time, the paper should quantify when the learned mapping transfers (e.g., by comparing validation and test rankings of base models per dataset) and should compare TimeFuse against a dataset-identity-only baseline or per-dataset static weights to show that the per-sample variation in Figure 4 is predictive rather than noise.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2] The sentence 'Formally, let Xin ∈ R^{Tin×d} denote an input time series...' is duplicated in consecutive paragraphs; please remove one occurrence.
  2. [Appendix A.2] The metric formulas for MSE, MAE, RMSE, and MAPE omit normalization by the number of samples and series elements; as written, MSE is a sum rather than a mean, which conflicts with the reported magnitudes.
  3. [Table 11] The header contains the typo 'Forcast' (should be 'Forecast'), and the paper inconsistently uses both 'TimeFuse' and 'TIMEFUSE'; please standardize the naming.
  4. [Table 5] The header layout is confusing because 'Normal', 'Zero-shot', and 'Best Individual' are interleaved with repeated 'TIMEFUSE' entries; clearer column grouping or captions would help readability.
  5. [Figure 6] The visualization of learned fusor weights is referenced in the text but does not appear in the provided manuscript; please ensure the actual figure is included.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: TimeFuse's fusion weights are learned on held-out validation and evaluated on held-out test sets, and no equation reduces the reported predictions to the fitted inputs.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. Equations (1) and (2) define the fusor as a learned map from meta-features to weights, optimized to minimize the expected loss between the convex combination of base-model predictions and the ground truth. This is an ordinary supervised objective: the weights are free parameters fit on the held-out validation sets (Section 3.2: 'The fusor is trained on the held-out validation set D_val'), and all reported forecasts are evaluated on separate test sets (Section 4). No equation defines the 24 meta-features in terms of the target X_out, nor the target in terms of the features; Table 1 lists fixed functions of the input series only. The claim that fused predictions beat the best base model is not forced by construction, since a convex combination can underperform its best member when the learned weights are poor; the reported per-sample improvements are empirical outcomes. The sample-level inspection in Figure 1 is a motivation computed on test samples, but it is not a training signal and does not enter the fusor objective. Self-citations are plentiful in related work and Appendix D, but none is load-bearing for the method: the meta-feature choice cites external libraries (TSFEL, Henderson & Fulcher) and the base-model configurations cite TSLib. Appendix D explicitly concedes that distribution shift can make validation-strong models hurt test fusion and that removing such models sometimes improves results; that is a limitation on the universality of the claims, not a circular step. Overall, no prediction in the paper reduces by construction to a fitted parameter, a definition, or a self-citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The framework relies on two unproven premises: that validation data represent test distributions, and that the meta-feature space preserves the relative accuracy of base models. Neither is derived; the meta-features are hand-picked. The fusor weights are the intended learned model, not a hidden fitting constant, but the architecture and feature set are choices not justified by a search or theory.

free parameters (2)
  • Meta-feature set (24 descriptors) = Hand-crafted, no fitted values
    The 24 descriptors in Table 1 are chosen manually from statistical, temporal, spectral, and multivariate domains. The paper ablates each group but does not search or justify the completeness of this set.
  • Fusor architecture and training hyperparameters = Single linear layer, lr=1e-3, batch=32, Huber loss
    These choices are made by hand and no sensitivity analysis is reported. The linear layer is defended on interpretability and efficiency, but the specific hyperparameters are arbitrary.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Validation sets used for fusor training are representative of test distributions
    Fusor is trained on Dval and applied to test; the paper acknowledges distribution shift as a limitation in Appendix D.
  • ad hoc to paper The 24 meta-features capture the information needed to rank base models per sample
    Meta-features are hand-selected (Table 1); no proof or search that they are sufficient; ablation only shows each group contributes.
  • domain assumption Base model predictions are fixed and their training is decoupled from the fusor
    The problem statement and Equation 2 assume base models are pre-trained and not updated during fusor training.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Breaking Silos: Adaptive Model Fusion Unlocks Better Time Series Forecasting." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YZNRR5V2

@misc{pith2026250518442,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Breaking Silos: Adaptive Model Fusion Unlocks Better Time Series Forecasting},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YZNRR5V2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.18442}
}
read the original abstract

Time-series forecasting plays a critical role in many real-world applications. Although increasingly powerful models have been developed and achieved superior results on benchmark datasets, through a fine-grained sample-level inspection, we find that (i) no single model consistently outperforms others across different test samples, but instead (ii) each model excels in specific cases. These findings prompt us to explore how to adaptively leverage the distinct strengths of various forecasting models for different samples. We introduce TimeFuse, a framework for collective time-series forecasting with sample-level adaptive fusion of heterogeneous models. TimeFuse utilizes meta-features to characterize input time series and trains a learnable fusor to predict optimal model fusion weights for any given input. The fusor can leverage samples from diverse datasets for joint training, allowing it to adapt to a wide variety of temporal patterns and thus generalize to new inputs, even from unseen datasets. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of TimeFuse in various long-/short-term forecasting tasks, achieving near-universal improvement over the state-of-the-art individual models. Code is available at https://github.com/ZhiningLiu1998/TimeFuse.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.18442 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Sample-level inspection2 reveals that each time series model excels in a considerable fraction of test samples, highlight￾ing their unique strengths for certain types of input. TIMEFUSE adaptively leverages the strengths of different models for each input time series, achieving dynamically fused forecasting that outperforms the best individual model on up to 95.1% samples. 2021; Fu et al., 2025). Due to the complexi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The TIMEFUSE framework for ensemble time-series forecasting, best viewed in color. refer to as the model zoo. Each fi in F is an independently trained model, offering diverse predictions for a given in￾put. As shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison between TIMEFUSE and static ensemble methods with validation top-k model filtering. 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 AutoF (2021) InF (2021) LightTS (2022) NSTF (2022) FEDF (2022) FreTS (2023) DLin (2023) PTST (2023) TNet (2023) iTF (2024) PAttn (2024) TMixer (2024) TXer (2024) ETTh1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 ETTh2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 ETTm1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 ETTm2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Weather 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Electricity 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Traffi… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Visualization of the average model fusion weights by TIMEFUSE across datasets, with variation bars showing standard deviations between samples within the dataset. TIMEFUSE adaptively produces diverse ensemble strategies, effectively supporting tasks that benefit from e…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: TIMEFUSE achieves increasingly better forecasting per￾formance as more base models are included in the model zoo. TIMEFUSE improves with a more diverse model zoo. To assess whether TIMEFUSE can leverage emerging models to further enhance its capabilities, we check how …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

113 extracted references · 55 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION format.date year duplicate empty "emp...

  2. [2]

    https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/ElectricityLoadDiagrams20112014

    UCI Electricity Load Time Series Dataset . https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/ElectricityLoadDiagrams20112014

  3. [3]

    http://pems.dot.ca.gov/

    Traffic Dataset . http://pems.dot.ca.gov/

  4. [4]

    Anderson, O. D. Time-series. 2nd edn., 1976

    1976

  5. [5]

    F., Stella, L., Turkmen, C., Zhang, X., Mercado, P., Shen, H., Shchur, O., Rangapuram, S

    Ansari, A. F., Stella, L., Turkmen, C., Zhang, X., Mercado, P., Shen, H., Shchur, O., Rangapuram, S. S., Arango, S. P., Kapoor, S., et al. Chronos: Learning the language of time series. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.07815, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Pagerank bandits for link prediction

    Ban, Y., Zou, J., Li, Z., Qi, Y., Fu, D., Kang, J., Tong, H., and He, J. Pagerank bandits for link prediction. In Globersons, A., Mackey, L., Belgrave, D., Fan, A., Paquet, U., Tomczak, J. M., and Zhang, C. (eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 38: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2024, NeurIPS 2024, Vancouver...

    2024

  7. [7]

    Adaptive test-time personalization for federated learning

    Bao, W., Wei, T., Wang, H., and He, J. Adaptive test-time personalization for federated learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36: 0 77882--77914, 2023

    2023

  8. [8]

    Matcha: Mitigating graph structure shifts with test-time adaptation

    Bao, W., Zeng, Z., Liu, Z., Tong, H., and He, J. Matcha: Mitigating graph structure shifts with test-time adaptation. In The Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2025

    2025

Show all 113 references
  1. [9]

    Tsfel: Time series feature extraction library

    Barandas, M., Folgado, D., Fernandes, L., Santos, S., Abreu, M., Bota, P., Liu, H., Schultz, T., and Gamboa, H. Tsfel: Time series feature extraction library. SoftwareX, 11: 0 100456, 2020

    2020

  2. [10]

    Ensemble selection from libraries of models

    Caruana, R., Niculescu-Mizil, A., Crew, G., and Ksikes, A. Ensemble selection from libraries of models. In Proceedings of the twenty-first international conference on Machine learning, pp.\ 18, 2004

    2004

  3. [11]

    F., Skabardonis, A., Varaiya, P

    Chen, C., Petty, K. F., Skabardonis, A., Varaiya, P. P., and Jia, Z. Freeway performance measurement system: Mining loop detector data. Transportation Research Record, 2001

    2001

  4. [12]

    Choi, J. Y. and Lee, B. Combining lstm network ensemble via adaptive weighting for improved time series forecasting. Mathematical problems in engineering, 2018 0 (1): 0 2470171, 2018

    2018

  5. [13]

    E., and Shah, K

    Deb, C., Zhang, F., Yang, J., Lee, S. E., and Shah, K. W. A review on time series forecasting techniques for building energy consumption. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 74: 0 902--924, 2017

    2017

  6. [14]

    I., and Chen, H

    Fang, L., Chen, Y., Yu, W., Liu, Y., Tang, L.-a., Torvik, V. I., and Chen, H. Tsla: A multi-task time series language model. In ICASSP 2025-2025 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pp.\ 1--5. IEEE, 2025

    2025

  7. [15]

    Adversarial graph contrastive learning with information regularization

    Feng, S., Jing, B., Zhu, Y., and Tong, H. Adversarial graph contrastive learning with information regularization. In Proceedings of the ACM web conference 2022, pp.\ 1362--1371, 2022

    2022

  8. [16]

    Auto-sklearn 2.0: Hands-free automl via meta-learning

    Feurer, M., Eggensperger, K., Falkner, S., Lindauer, M., and Hutter, F. Auto-sklearn 2.0: Hands-free automl via meta-learning. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 23 0 (261): 0 1--61, 2022. URL http://jmlr.org/papers/v23/21-0992.html

    2022

  9. [17]

    Unsupervised scalable representation learning for multivariate time series

    Franceschi, J.-Y., Dieuleveut, A., and Jaggi, M. Unsupervised scalable representation learning for multivariate time series. Advances in neural information processing systems, 32, 2019

    2019

  10. [18]

    I., and He, J

    Fu, D., Fang, L., Maciejewski, R., Torvik, V. I., and He, J. Meta-learned metrics over multi-evolution temporal graphs. In KDD , 2022

    2022

  11. [19]

    I., and He, J

    Fu, D., Fang, L., Li, Z., Tong, H., Torvik, V. I., and He, J. Parametric graph representations in the era of foundation models: A survey and position. CoRR, abs/2410.12126, 2024 a . doi:10.48550/ARXIV.2410.12126. URL https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2410.12126

    2024 doi arXiv

  12. [20]

    Vcr-graphormer: A mini-batch graph transformer via virtual connections

    Fu, D., Hua, Z., Xie, Y., Fang, J., Zhang, S., Sancak, K., Wu, H., Malevich, A., He, J., and Long, B. Vcr-graphormer: A mini-batch graph transformer via virtual connections. In ICLR , 2024 b

    2024

  13. [21]

    Generating fine-grained causality in climate time series data for forecasting and anomaly detection

    Fu, D., Zhu, Y., Tong, H., Weldemariam, K., Bhardwaj, O., and He, J. Generating fine-grained causality in climate time series data for forecasting and anomaly detection. CoRR, 2024 c

    2024

  14. [22]

    F., and He, J

    Fu, D., Zhu, Y., Liu, Z., Zheng, L., Lin, X., Li, Z., Fang, L., Tieu, K., Bhardwaj, O., Weldemariam, K., Tong, H., Hamann, H. F., and He, J. Climatebench-m: A multi-modal climate data benchmark with a simple generative method. CoRR, abs/2504.07394, 2025. doi:10.48550/ARXIV.250...

    2025 doi arXiv

  15. [23]

    On the sensitivity of individual fairness: Measures and robust algorithms

    He, X., Kang, J., Qiu, R., Wang, F., Sepulveda, J., and Tong, H. On the sensitivity of individual fairness: Measures and robust algorithms. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pp.\ 829--838, 2024

    2024

  16. [24]

    Temporal heterogeneous graph generation with privacy, utility, and efficiency

    He, X., Fu, D., Tong, H., Maciejewski, R., and He, J. Temporal heterogeneous graph generation with privacy, utility, and efficiency. In ICLR , 2025

    2025

  17. [25]

    and Fulcher, B

    Henderson, T. and Fulcher, B. D. An empirical evaluation of time-series feature sets. In 2021 International Conference on Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW), pp.\ 1032--1038. IEEE, 2021

    2021

  18. [26]

    Ho, T. K. The random subspace method for constructing decision forests. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 20 0 (8): 0 832--844, 1998

    1998

  19. [27]

    A review on time series aggregation methods for energy system models

    Hoffmann, M., Kotzur, L., Stolten, D., and Robinius, M. A review on time series aggregation methods for energy system models. Energies, 13 0 (3): 0 641, 2020

    2020

  20. [28]

    Huber, P. J. Robust estimation of a location parameter. In Breakthroughs in statistics: Methodology and distribution, pp.\ 492--518. Springer, 1992

    1992

  21. [29]

    Network of tensor time series

    Jing, B., Tong, H., and Zhu, Y. Network of tensor time series. In Proceedings of the Web Conference 2021, pp.\ 2425--2437, 2021

    2021

  22. [30]

    Retrieval based time series forecasting

    Jing, B., Zhang, S., Zhu, Y., Peng, B., Guan, K., Margenot, A., and Tong, H. Retrieval based time series forecasting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.13525, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Towards editing time series

    Jing, B., Gu, S., Chen, T., Yang, Z., Li, D., He, J., and Ren, K. Towards editing time series. In The Thirty-eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2024 a

    2024

  24. [32]

    Automated contrastive learning strategy search for time series

    Jing, B., Wang, Y., Sui, G., Hong, J., He, J., Yang, Y., Li, D., and Ren, K. Automated contrastive learning strategy search for time series. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pp.\ 4612--4620, 2024 b

    2024

  25. [33]

    Causality-aware spatiotemporal graph neural networks for spatiotemporal time series imputation

    Jing, B., Zhou, D., Ren, K., and Yang, C. Causality-aware spatiotemporal graph neural networks for spatiotemporal time series imputation. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pp.\ 1027--1037, 2024 c

    2024

  26. [34]

    Kingma, D. P. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980, 2014

    2014 arXiv

  27. [35]

    K., and Crone, S

    Kourentzes, N., Barrow, D. K., and Crone, S. F. Neural network ensemble operators for time series forecasting. Expert Systems with Applications, 41 0 (9): 0 4235--4244, 2014

    2014

  28. [36]

    Forecasting day-ahead electricity prices: A review of state-of-the-art algorithms, best practices and an open-access benchmark

    Lago, J., Marcjasz, G., De Schutter, B., and Weron, R. Forecasting day-ahead electricity prices: A review of state-of-the-art algorithms, best practices and an open-access benchmark. Applied Energy, 293: 0 116983, 2021 a

    2021

  29. [37]

    Forecasting day-ahead electricity prices: A review of state-of-the-art algorithms, best practices and an open-access benchmark

    Lago, J., Marcjasz, G., De Schutter, B., and Weron, R. Forecasting day-ahead electricity prices: A review of state-of-the-art algorithms, best practices and an open-access benchmark. Applied Energy, 293: 0 116983, 2021 b

    2021

  30. [38]

    Modeling long-and short-term temporal patterns with deep neural networks

    Lai, G., Chang, W.-C., Yang, Y., and Liu, H. Modeling long-and short-term temporal patterns with deep neural networks. In The 41st international ACM SIGIR conference on research & development in information retrieval, pp.\ 95--104, 2018

    2018

  31. [39]

    Trend modeling for traffic time series analysis: An integrated study

    Li, L., Su, X., Zhang, Y., Lin, Y., and Li, Z. Trend modeling for traffic time series analysis: An integrated study. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 16 0 (6): 0 3430--3439, 2015

    2015

  32. [40]

    Everything evolves in personalized pagerank

    Li, Z., Fu, D., and He, J. Everything evolves in personalized pagerank. In Ding, Y., Tang, J., Sequeda, J. F., Aroyo, L., Castillo, C., and Houben, G. (eds.), Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2023, WWW 2023, Austin, TX, USA, 30 April 2023 - 4 May 2023 , pp.\ 3342--3352. A...

    2023

  33. [41]

    F., Tong, H., and He, J

    Li, Z., Lin, X., Liu, Z., Zou, J., Wu, Z., Zheng, L., Fu, D., Zhu, Y., Hamann, H. F., Tong, H., and He, J. Language in the flow of time: Time-series-paired texts weaved into a unified temporal narrative. CoRR, abs/2502.08942, 2025. doi:10.48550/ARXIV.2502.08942. URL https://do...

    2025 doi

  34. [42]

    and Zohren, S

    Lim, B. and Zohren, S. Time-series forecasting with deep learning: a survey. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 379 0 (2194): 0 20200209, 2021

    2021

  35. [43]

    Backtime: Backdoor attacks on multivariate time series forecasting

    Lin, X., Liu, Z., Fu, D., Qiu, R., and Tong, H. Backtime: Backdoor attacks on multivariate time series forecasting. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37: 0 131344--131368, 2024

    2024

  36. [44]

    Cats: Mitigating correlation shift for multivariate time series classification

    Lin, X., Zeng, Z., Wei, T., Liu, Z., Tong, H., et al. Cats: Mitigating correlation shift for multivariate time series classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.04283, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Non-stationary transformers: Rethinking the stationarity in time series forecasting

    Liu, Y., Wu, H., Wang, J., and Long, M. Non-stationary transformers: Rethinking the stationarity in time series forecasting. NeurIPS, 2022

    2022

  38. [46]

    itransformer: Inverted transformers are effective for time series forecasting

    Liu, Y., Hu, T., Zhang, H., Wu, H., Wang, S., Ma, L., and Long, M. itransformer: Inverted transformers are effective for time series forecasting. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2024 a

    2024

  39. [47]

    Self-paced ensemble for highly imbalanced massive data classification

    Liu, Z., Cao, W., Gao, Z., Bian, J., Chen, H., Chang, Y., and Liu, T.-Y. Self-paced ensemble for highly imbalanced massive data classification. In 2020 IEEE 36th international conference on data engineering (ICDE), pp.\ 841--852. IEEE, 2020 a

    2020

  40. [48]

    Mesa: boost ensemble imbalanced learning with meta-sampler

    Liu, Z., Wei, P., Jiang, J., Cao, W., Bian, J., and Chang, Y. Mesa: boost ensemble imbalanced learning with meta-sampler. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33: 0 14463--14474, 2020 b

    2020

  41. [49]

    Imbens: Ensemble class-imbalanced learning in python

    Liu, Z., Kang, J., Tong, H., and Chang, Y. Imbens: Ensemble class-imbalanced learning in python. arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.12776, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Class-imbalanced graph learning without class rebalancing

    Liu, Z., Qiu, R., Zeng, Z., Yoo, H., Zhou, D., Xu, Z., Zhu, Y., Weldemariam, K., He, J., and Tong, H. Class-imbalanced graph learning without class rebalancing. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024 b

    2024

  43. [51]

    Mienye, I. D. and Sun, Y. A survey of ensemble learning: Concepts, algorithms, applications, and prospects. IEEE Access, 10: 0 99129--99149, 2022

    2022

  44. [52]

    H., Sinthong, P., and Kalagnanam, J

    Nie, Y., Nguyen, N. H., Sinthong, P., and Kalagnanam, J. A time series is worth 64 words: Long-term forecasting with transformers. ICLR, 2023

    2023

  45. [53]

    and Torgo, L

    Oliveira, M. and Torgo, L. Ensembles for time series forecasting. In Asian Conference on Machine Learning, pp.\ 360--370. PMLR, 2015

    2015

  46. [54]

    Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning library

    Paszke, A., Gross, S., Massa, F., Lerer, A., Bradbury, J., Chanan, G., Killeen, T., Lin, Z., Gimelshein, N., Antiga, L., et al. Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning library. Advances in neural information processing systems, 32, 2019

    2019

  47. [55]

    and Tong, H

    Qiu, R. and Tong, H. Gradient compressed sensing: A query-efficient gradient estimator for high-dimensional zeroth-order optimization. In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024

    2024

  48. [56]

    DIMES : A differentiable meta solver for combinatorial optimization problems

    Qiu, R., Sun, Z., and Yang, Y. DIMES : A differentiable meta solver for combinatorial optimization problems. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 35, pp.\ 25531--25546, 2022

    2022

  49. [57]

    V., Zhang, Y., and Tong, H

    Qiu, R., Wang, D., Ying, L., Poor, H. V., Zhang, Y., and Tong, H. Reconstructing graph diffusion history from a single snapshot. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp.\ 1978--1988, 2023

    1978

  50. [58]

    TUCKET : A tensor time series data structure for efficient and accurate factor analysis over time ranges

    Qiu, R., Jang, J.-G., Lin, X., Liu, L., and Tong, H. TUCKET : A tensor time series data structure for efficient and accurate factor analysis over time ranges. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 17 0 (13), 2024 a

    2024

  51. [59]

    Ask, and it shall be given: On the Turing completeness of prompting

    Qiu, R., Xu, Z., Bao, W., and Tong, H. Ask, and it shall be given: On the Turing completeness of prompting. arXiv, 2411.01992, 2024 b

    2024 arXiv

  52. [60]

    W., Tong, H., Ezick, J., and Lott, C

    Qiu, R., Zeng, W. W., Tong, H., Ezick, J., and Lott, C. How efficient is LLM -generated code? A rigorous & high-standard benchmark. arXiv, 2406.06647, 2024 c

    2024 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Canon: Complex analytics of network of networks for modeling adversarial activities

    Roach, S., Ni, C., Kopylov, A., Lu, T.-C., Xu, J., Zhang, S., Du, B., Zhou, D., Wu, J., Liu, L., et al. Canon: Complex analytics of network of networks for modeling adversarial activities. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data), pp.\ 1634--1643. IEEE, 2020

    2020

  54. [62]

    and Rokach, L

    Sagi, O. and Rokach, L. Ensemble learning: A survey. Wiley interdisciplinary reviews: data mining and knowledge discovery, 8 0 (4): 0 e1249, 2018

    2018

  55. [63]

    B., Gudelek, M

    Sezer, O. B., Gudelek, M. U., and Ozbayoglu, A. M. Financial time series forecasting with deep learning: A systematic literature review: 2005--2019. Applied soft computing, 90: 0 106181, 2020

    2005

  56. [64]

    C., Erickson, N., Shen, H., Shirkov, A., Hu, T., and Wang, B

    Shchur, O., Turkmen, A. C., Erickson, N., Shen, H., Shirkov, A., Hu, T., and Wang, B. Autogluon--timeseries: Automl for probabilistic time series forecasting. In International Conference on Automated Machine Learning, pp.\ 9--1. PMLR, 2023

    2023

  57. [65]

    A., Gupta, V., Althoff, T., and Hartvigsen, T

    Tan, M., Merrill, M. A., Gupta, V., Althoff, T., and Hartvigsen, T. Are language models actually useful for time series forecasting? In The Thirty-eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2024

    2024

  58. [66]

    F., and He, J

    Tieu, K., Fu, D., Zhu, Y., Hamann, H. F., and He, J. Temporal graph neural tangent kernel with graphon-guaranteed. In NeurIPS, 2024

    2024

  59. [67]

    Invariant link selector for spatial-temporal out-of-distribution problem

    Tieu, K., Fu, D., Wu, J., and He, J. Invariant link selector for spatial-temporal out-of-distribution problem. In The 28th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, 2025

    2025

  60. [68]

    Networked time series imputation via position-aware graph enhanced variational autoencoders

    Wang, D., Yan, Y., Qiu, R., Zhu, Y., Guan, K., Margenot, A., and Tong, H. Networked time series imputation via position-aware graph enhanced variational autoencoders. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp.\ 2256--2268, 2023

    2023

  61. [69]

    Learning graph quantized tokenizers

    Wang, L., Hassani, K., Zhang, S., Fu, D., Yuan, B., Cong, W., Hua, Z., Wu, H., Yao, N., and Long, B. Learning graph quantized tokenizers. In ICLR , 2025

    2025

  62. [70]

    Y., and ZHOU, J

    Wang, S., Wu, H., Shi, X., Hu, T., Luo, H., Ma, L., Zhang, J. Y., and ZHOU, J. Timemixer: Decomposable multiscale mixing for time series forecasting. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2024 a

    2024

  63. [71]

    Deep time series models: A comprehensive survey and benchmark

    Wang, Y., Wu, H., Dong, J., Liu, Y., Long, M., and Wang, J. Deep time series models: A comprehensive survey and benchmark. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.13278, 2024 b

    2024 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Timexer: Empowering transformers for time series forecasting with exogenous variables

    Wang, Y., Wu, H., Dong, J., Qin, G., Zhang, H., Liu, Y., Qiu, Y., Wang, J., and Long, M. Timexer: Empowering transformers for time series forecasting with exogenous variables. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.19072, 2024 c

    2024 arXiv

  65. [73]

    and He, J

    Wei, T. and He, J. Comprehensive fair meta-learned recommender system. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp.\ 1989--1999, 2022

    1989

  66. [74]

    Fast adaptation for cold-start collaborative filtering with meta-learning

    Wei, T., Wu, Z., Li, R., Hu, Z., Feng, F., He, X., Sun, Y., and Wang, W. Fast adaptation for cold-start collaborative filtering with meta-learning. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM), pp.\ 661--670. IEEE, 2020

    2020

  67. [75]

    Model-agnostic counterfactual reasoning for eliminating popularity bias in recommender system

    Wei, T., Feng, F., Chen, J., Wu, Z., Yi, J., and He, X. Model-agnostic counterfactual reasoning for eliminating popularity bias in recommender system. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGKDD conference on knowledge discovery & data mining, pp.\ 1791--1800, 2021

    2021

  68. [76]

    Augmentations in hypergraph contrastive learning: Fabricated and generative

    Wei, T., You, Y., Chen, T., Shen, Y., He, J., and Wang, Z. Augmentations in hypergraph contrastive learning: Fabricated and generative. Advances in neural information processing systems, 35: 0 1909--1922, 2022

    1909

  69. [77]

    Towards unified multi-modal personalization: Large vision-language models for generative recommendation and beyond

    Wei, T., Jin, B., Li, R., Zeng, H., Wang, Z., Sun, J., Yin, Q., Lu, H., Wang, S., He, J., et al. Towards unified multi-modal personalization: Large vision-language models for generative recommendation and beyond. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.10667, 2024 a

    2024 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Robust watermarking for diffusion models: A unified multi-dimensional recipe, 2024 b

    Wei, T., Qiu, R., Chen, Y., Qi, Y., Lin, J., Xu, W., Nag, S., Li, R., Lu, H., Wang, Z., Luo, C., Liu, H., Wang, S., He, J., He, Q., and Tang, X. Robust watermarking for diffusion models: A unified multi-dimensional recipe, 2024 b . URL https://openreview.net/pdf?id=O13fIFEB81

    2024

  71. [79]

    Connecting domains and contrasting samples: A ladder for domain generalization

    Wei, T., Chen, Y., He, X., and He, J. Connecting domains and contrasting samples: A ladder for domain generalization. 2025. URL https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3690624.3709280

    2025

  72. [80]

    Autoformer: Decomposition transformers with Auto-Correlation for long-term series forecasting

    Wu, H., Xu, J., Wang, J., and Long, M. Autoformer: Decomposition transformers with Auto-Correlation for long-term series forecasting. NeurIPS, 2021

    2021

  73. [81]

    TimesNet : Temporal 2d-variation modeling for general time series analysis

    Wu, H., Hu, T., Liu, Y., Zhou, H., Wang, J., and Long, M. TimesNet : Temporal 2d-variation modeling for general time series analysis. ICLR, 2023

    2023

  74. [82]

    Fair anomaly detection for imbalanced groups

    Wu, Z., Zheng, L., Yu, Y., Qiu, R., Birge, J., and He, J. Fair anomaly detection for imbalanced groups. arXiv, 2409.10951, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  75. [83]

    F., Han, J., and Tong, H

    Xu, H., Yan, Y., Wang, D., Xu, Z., Zeng, Z., Abdelzaher, T. F., Han, J., and Tong, H. Slog: An inductive spectral graph neural network beyond polynomial filter. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning

  76. [84]

    Language models are graph learners

    Xu, Z., Hassani, K., Zhang, S., Zeng, H., Yasunaga, M., Wang, L., Fu, D., Yao, N., Long, B., and Tong, H. Language models are graph learners. CoRR, 2024 a

    2024

  77. [85]

    Discrete-state continuous-time diffusion for graph generation

    Xu, Z., Qiu, R., Chen, Y., Chen, H., Fan, X., Pan, M., Zeng, Z., Das, M., and Tong, H. Discrete-state continuous-time diffusion for graph generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.11416, 2024 b

    2024 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Dynamic knowledge graph alignment

    Yan, Y., Liu, L., Ban, Y., Jing, B., and Tong, H. Dynamic knowledge graph alignment. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 35, pp.\ 4564--4572, 2021 a

    2021

  79. [87]

    Bright: A bridging algorithm for network alignment

    Yan, Y., Zhang, S., and Tong, H. Bright: A bridging algorithm for network alignment. In Proceedings of the web conference 2021, pp.\ 3907--3917, 2021 b

    2021

  80. [88]

    Dissecting cross-layer dependency inference on multi-layered inter-dependent networks

    Yan, Y., Zhou, Q., Li, J., Abdelzaher, T., and Tong, H. Dissecting cross-layer dependency inference on multi-layered inter-dependent networks. In Proceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management, pp.\ 2341--2351, 2022

    2022

  81. [89]

    From trainable negative depth to edge heterophily in graphs

    Yan, Y., Chen, Y., Chen, H., Xu, M., Das, M., Yang, H., and Tong, H. From trainable negative depth to edge heterophily in graphs. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36: 0 70162--70178, 2023 a

    2023

  82. [90]

    Reconciling competing sampling strategies of network embedding

    Yan, Y., Jing, B., Liu, L., Wang, R., Li, J., Abdelzaher, T., and Tong, H. Reconciling competing sampling strategies of network embedding. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36: 0 6844--6861, 2023 b

    2023

  83. [91]

    Thegcn: Temporal heterophilic graph convolutional network

    Yan, Y., Chen, Y., Chen, H., Li, X., Xu, Z., Zeng, Z., Liu, L., Liu, Z., and Tong, H. Thegcn: Temporal heterophilic graph convolutional network. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.16435, 2024 a

    2024 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Pacer: Network embedding from positional to structural

    Yan, Y., Hu, Y., Zhou, Q., Liu, L., Zeng, Z., Chen, Y., Pan, M., Chen, H., Das, M., and Tong, H. Pacer: Network embedding from positional to structural. In Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2024, pp.\ 2485--2496, 2024 b

    2024

  85. [93]

    Topological anonymous walk embedding: A new structural node embedding approach

    Yan, Y., Hu, Y., Zhou, Q., Wu, S., Wang, D., and Tong, H. Topological anonymous walk embedding: A new structural node embedding approach. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pp.\ 2796--2806, 2024 c

    2024

  86. [94]

    M., Bian, J., Chang, Y., Lurie, J

    Ye, H., Liu, Z., Cao, W., Amiri, A. M., Bian, J., Chang, Y., Lurie, J. D., Weinstein, J., and Liu, T.-Y. Web-based long-term spine treatment outcome forecasting. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp.\ 3082--3092, 2023

    2023

  87. [95]

    Frequency-domain mlps are more effective learners in time series forecasting

    Yi, K., Zhang, Q., Fan, W., Wang, S., Wang, P., He, H., An, N., Lian, D., Cao, L., and Niu, Z. Frequency-domain mlps are more effective learners in time series forecasting. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

    2024

  88. [96]

    Ensuring user-side fairness in dynamic recommender systems

    Yoo, H., Zeng, Z., Kang, J., Qiu, R., Zhou, D., Liu, Z., Wang, F., Xu, C., Chan, E., and Tong, H. Ensuring user-side fairness in dynamic recommender systems. In Proceedings of the ACM on Web Conference 2024, pp.\ 3667--3678, 2024

    2024

  89. [97]

    Embracing plasticity: Balancing stability and plasticity in continual recommender systems

    Yoo, H., Kang, S., Qiu, R., Xu, C., Wang, F., and Tong, H. Embracing plasticity: Balancing stability and plasticity in continual recommender systems. In Proceedings of the 48th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 2025 a

    2025

  90. [98]

    Generalizable recommender system during temporal popularity distribution shifts

    Yoo, H., Qiu, R., Xu, C., Wang, F., and Tong, H. Generalizable recommender system during temporal popularity distribution shifts. In Proceedings of the 31st ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2025 b

    2025

  91. [99]

    Ensemble forecasting for complex time series using sparse representation and neural networks

    Yu, L., Zhao, Y., and Tang, L. Ensemble forecasting for complex time series using sparse representation and neural networks. Journal of Forecasting, 36 0 (2): 0 122--138, 2017

    2017

  92. [100]

    and Li, G

    Yuan, H. and Li, G. A survey of traffic prediction: from spatio-temporal data to intelligent transportation. Data Science and Engineering, 6 0 (1): 0 63--85, 2021

    2021

  93. [101]

    Are transformers effective for time series forecasting? AAAI, 2023 a

    Zeng, A., Chen, M., Zhang, L., and Xu, Q. Are transformers effective for time series forecasting? AAAI, 2023 a

    2023

  94. [102]

    Parrot: Position-aware regularized optimal transport for network alignment

    Zeng, Z., Zhang, S., Xia, Y., and Tong, H. Parrot: Position-aware regularized optimal transport for network alignment. In Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2023, pp.\ 372--382, 2023 b

    2023

  95. [103]

    Generative graph dictionary learning

    Zeng, Z., Zhu, R., Xia, Y., Zeng, H., and Tong, H. Generative graph dictionary learning. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pp.\ 40749--40769. PMLR, 2023 c

    2023

  96. [104]

    Hierarchical multi-marginal optimal transport for network alignment

    Zeng, Z., Du, B., Zhang, S., Xia, Y., Liu, Z., and Tong, H. Hierarchical multi-marginal optimal transport for network alignment. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 38, pp.\ 16660--16668, 2024 a

    2024

  97. [105]

    Graph mixup on approximate gromov--wasserstein geodesics

    Zeng, Z., Qiu, R., Xu, Z., Liu, Z., Yan, Y., Wei, T., Ying, L., He, J., and Tong, H. Graph mixup on approximate gromov--wasserstein geodesics. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024 b

    2024

  98. [106]

    F., Han, J., and Tong, H

    Zeng, Z., Qiu, R., Bao, W., Wei, T., Lin, X., Yan, Y., Abdelzaher, T. F., Han, J., and Tong, H. Pave your own path: Graph gradual domain adaptation on fused gromov-wasserstein geodesics. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.12709, 2025

    2025

  99. [107]

    Less is more: Fast multivariate time series forecasting with light sampling-oriented mlp structures

    Zhang, T., Zhang, Y., Cao, W., Bian, J., Yi, X., Zheng, S., and Li, J. Less is more: Fast multivariate time series forecasting with light sampling-oriented mlp structures. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.01186, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  100. [108]

    Drgnn: Deep residual graph neural network with contrastive learning

    Zheng, L., Fu, D., Maciejewski, R., and He, J. Drgnn: Deep residual graph neural network with contrastive learning. Transactions on Machine Learning Research, 2024 a

    2024

  101. [109]

    Heterogeneous contrastive learning for foundation models and beyond

    Zheng, L., Jing, B., Li, Z., Tong, H., and He, J. Heterogeneous contrastive learning for foundation models and beyond. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp.\ 6666--6676, 2024 b

    2024

  102. [110]

    Pyg-ssl: A graph self-supervised learning toolkit

    Zheng, L., Jing, B., Li, Z., Zeng, Z., Wei, T., Ai, M., He, X., Liu, L., Fu, D., You, J., Tong, H., and He, J. Pyg-ssl: A graph self-supervised learning toolkit. CoRR, abs/2412.21151, 2024 c . doi:10.48550/ARXIV.2412.21151. URL https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2412.21151

    2024 doi arXiv

  103. [111]

    Informer: Beyond efficient transformer for long sequence time-series forecasting

    Zhou, H., Zhang, S., Peng, J., Zhang, S., Li, J., Xiong, H., and Zhang, W. Informer: Beyond efficient transformer for long sequence time-series forecasting. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 35, pp.\ 11106--11115, 2021

    2021

  104. [112]

    FEDformer : Frequency enhanced decomposed transformer for long-term series forecasting

    Zhou, T., Ma, Z., Wen, Q., Wang, X., Sun, L., and Jin, R. FEDformer : Frequency enhanced decomposed transformer for long-term series forecasting. ICML, 2022

    2022

  105. [113]

    GTR: graph-table-rag for cross-table question answering

    Zou, J., Fu, D., Chen, S., He, X., Li, Z., Zhu, Y., Han, J., and He, J. GTR: graph-table-rag for cross-table question answering. CoRR, abs/2504.01346, 2025. doi:10.48550/ARXIV.2504.01346. URL https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2504.01346

    2025 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.