about
Are Language Models Actually Useful for Time Series Forecasting? (arxiv.org)
7 points by cl42 on Dec 27, 2024 | hide | past | pdf | 7 comments on HN

In plain words: They tested three popular forecasting tools that use language models by deleting the language model or swapping in a simple layer that just compares past values. Forecasting stayed the same or got better, and simple models trained from scratch matched the expensive pretrained ones.

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) are being applied to time series forecasting. But are language models actually useful for time series? In a series of ablation studies on three recent and popular LLM-based time series forecasting methods, we find that removing the LLM component or replacing it with a basic attention layer does not degrade forecasting performance -- in most cases, the results even improve! We also find that despite their significant computational cost, pretrained LLMs do no better than models trained from scratch, do not represent the sequential dependencies in time series, and do not assist in few-shot settings. Additionally, we explore time series encoders and find that patching and attention structures perform similarly to LLM-based forecasters.

Mingtian Tan, Mike A. Merrill, Vinayak Gupta, Tim Althoff, Thomas Hartvigsen
arXiv:2406.16964 · cs.LG, cs.AI · submitted Jun 22, 2024 · updated Oct 26, 2024
abstract · pdf · html · Accepted to NeurIPS 2024 (Spotlight)

add comment on HN

9 months ago (things may have changed) someone showed simple time series models outperforming Chronos.

https://github.com/Nixtla/nixtla/tree/main/experiments/amazo...

In domains where there is inherent randomness in the process, simple (ensemble) models tend to outperform complex ones. Nonlinear models can capture nonlinear patterns but they also tend to fit noise.

Neural network models have been shown to work really well on text, images, sound etc, but these types of data have no inherent randomness in them. A piece of text is a piece of text.

Whereas most time series are usually trying to forecast quantities that have complex unmeasured causality, like natural gas prices. Past behavior is no guarantee of future behavior. Capturing the nonlinear behavior in the past better can actually degrade future performance. While simple models tend to be more robust because they tend to not overly bias towards any one trend.

I've been skeptical about the "time series" LLMs papers from earlier, so this is interesting to see. Curious if others disagree with this paper!
You should use the original title when posting these.
Thank for the feedback! :) I included “No” because that’s the paper’s conclusion. Hoping to save people the effort of reading.
That's not how HN works, though, and the site docs ask you to use original titles.
Gotcha, thanks! Updated.
We all know Betteridge’s law of headlines ;)