Goto

Collaborating Authors

 oom





This Time is Different: An Observability Perspective on Time Series Foundation Models

Cohen, Ben, Khwaja, Emaad, Doubli, Youssef, Lemaachi, Salahidine, Lettieri, Chris, Masson, Charles, Miccinilli, Hugo, Ramé, Elise, Ren, Qiqi, Rostamizadeh, Afshin, Terrail, Jean Ogier du, Toon, Anna-Monica, Wang, Kan, Xie, Stephan, Xu, Zongzhe, Zhukova, Viktoriya, Asker, David, Talwalkar, Ameet, Abou-Amal, Othmane

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

We introduce Toto, a time series forecasting foundation model with 151 million parameters. Toto uses a modern decoder-only architecture coupled with architectural innovations designed to account for specific challenges found in multivariate observability time series data. Toto's pre-training corpus is a mixture of observability data, open datasets, and synthetic data, and is 4-10$\times$ larger than those of leading time series foundation models. Additionally, we introduce BOOM, a large-scale benchmark consisting of 350 million observations across 2,807 real-world time series. For both Toto and BOOM, we source observability data exclusively from Datadog's own telemetry and internal observability metrics. Extensive evaluations demonstrate that Toto achieves state-of-the-art performance on both BOOM and on established general purpose time series forecasting benchmarks. Toto's model weights, inference code, and evaluation scripts, as well as BOOM's data and evaluation code, are all available as open source under the Apache 2.0 License available at https://huggingface.co/Datadog/Toto-Open-Base-1.0 and https://github.com/DataDog/toto.




Trends in Frontier AI Model Count: A Forecast to 2028

Kumar, Iyngkarran, Manning, Sam

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Governments are starting to impose requirements on AI models based on how much compute was used to train them. For example, the EU AI Act imposes requirements on providers of general-purpose AI with systemic risk, which includes systems trained using greater than $10^{25}$ floating point operations (FLOP). In the United States' AI Diffusion Framework, a training compute threshold of $10^{26}$ FLOP is used to identify "controlled models" which face a number of requirements. We explore how many models such training compute thresholds will capture over time. We estimate that by the end of 2028, there will be between 103-306 foundation models exceeding the $10^{25}$ FLOP threshold put forward in the EU AI Act (90% CI), and 45-148 models exceeding the $10^{26}$ FLOP threshold that defines controlled models in the AI Diffusion Framework (90% CI). We also find that the number of models exceeding these absolute compute thresholds each year will increase superlinearly -- that is, each successive year will see more new models captured within the threshold than the year before. Thresholds that are defined with respect to the largest training run to date (for example, such that all models within one order of magnitude of the largest training run to date are captured by the threshold) see a more stable trend, with a median forecast of 14-16 models being captured by this definition annually from 2025-2028.


Rethinking Structure Learning For Graph Neural Networks

Zheng, Yilun, Zhang, Zhuofan, Wang, Ziming, Li, Xiang, Luan, Sitao, Peng, Xiaojiang, Chen, Lihui

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

To improve the performance of Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), Graph Structure Learning (GSL) has been extensively applied to reconstruct or refine original graph structures, effectively addressing issues like heterophily, over-squashing, and noisy structures. While GSL is generally thought to improve GNN performance, it often leads to longer training times and more hyperparameter tuning. Besides, the distinctions among current GSL methods remain ambiguous from the perspective of GNN training, and there is a lack of theoretical analysis to quantify their effectiveness. Recent studies further suggest that, under fair comparisons with the same hyperparameter tuning, GSL does not consistently outperform baseline GNNs. This motivates us to ask a critical question: is GSL really useful for GNNs? To address this question, this paper makes two key contributions. First, we propose a new GSL framework, which includes three steps: GSL base (the representation used for GSL) construction, new structure construction, and view fusion, to better understand the effectiveness of GSL in GNNs. Second, after graph convolution, we analyze the differences in mutual information (MI) between node representations derived from the original topology and those from the newly constructed topology. Surprisingly, our empirical observations and theoretical analysis show that no matter which type of graph structure construction methods are used, after feeding the same GSL bases to the newly constructed graph, there is no MI gain compared to the original GSL bases. To fairly reassess the effectiveness of GSL, we conduct ablation experiments and find that it is the pretrained GSL bases that enhance GNN performance, and in most cases, GSL cannot improve GNN performance. This finding encourages us to rethink the essential components in GNNs, such as self-training and structural encoding, in GNN design rather than GSL.


A Closer Look at Deep Learning on Tabular Data

Ye, Han-Jia, Liu, Si-Yang, Cai, Hao-Run, Zhou, Qi-Le, Zhan, De-Chuan

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Tabular data is prevalent across various domains in machine learning. Although Deep Neural Network (DNN)-based methods have shown promising performance comparable to tree-based ones, in-depth evaluation of these methods is challenging due to varying performance ranks across diverse datasets. In this paper, we propose a comprehensive benchmark comprising 300 tabular datasets, covering a wide range of task types, size distributions, and domains. We perform an extensive comparison between state-of-the-art deep tabular methods and tree-based methods, revealing the average rank of all methods and highlighting the key factors that influence the success of deep tabular methods. Next, we analyze deep tabular methods based on their training dynamics, including changes in validation metrics and other statistics. For each dataset-method pair, we learn a mapping from both the meta-features of datasets and the first part of the validation curve to the final validation set performance and even the evolution of validation curves. This mapping extracts essential meta-features that influence prediction accuracy, helping the analysis of tabular methods from novel aspects. Based on the performance of all methods on this large benchmark, we identify two subsets of 45 datasets each. The first subset contains datasets that favor either tree-based methods or DNN-based methods, serving as effective analysis tools to evaluate strategies (e.g., attribute encoding strategies) for improving deep tabular models. The second subset contains datasets where the ranks of methods are consistent with the overall benchmark, acting as a probe for tabular analysis. These ``tiny tabular benchmarks'' will facilitate further studies on tabular data.


RoPINN: Region Optimized Physics-Informed Neural Networks

Wu, Haixu, Luo, Huakun, Ma, Yuezhou, Wang, Jianmin, Long, Mingsheng

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) have been widely applied to solve partial differential equations (PDEs) by enforcing outputs and gradients of deep models to satisfy target equations. Due to the limitation of numerical computation, PINNs are conventionally optimized on finite selected points. However, since PDEs are usually defined on continuous domains, solely optimizing models on scattered points may be insufficient to obtain an accurate solution for the whole domain. To mitigate this inherent deficiency of the default scatter-point optimization, this paper proposes and theoretically studies a new training paradigm as region optimization. Concretely, we propose to extend the optimization process of PINNs from isolated points to their continuous neighborhood regions, which can theoretically decrease the generalization error, especially for hidden high-order constraints of PDEs. A practical training algorithm, Region Optimized PINN (RoPINN), is seamlessly derived from this new paradigm, which is implemented by a straightforward but effective Monte Carlo sampling method. By calibrating the sampling process into trust regions, RoPINN finely balances sampling efficiency and generalization error. Experimentally, RoPINN consistently boosts the performance of diverse PINNs on a wide range of PDEs without extra backpropagation or gradient calculation.