Daily Papers

Long-term time series forecasting (LTSF) is important for various domains but is confronted by challenges in handling the complex temporal-contextual relationships. As multivariate input models underperforming some recent univariate counterparts, we posit that the issue lies in the inefficiency of existing multivariate LTSF Transformers to model series-wise relationships: the characteristic differences between series are often captured incorrectly. To address this, we introduce ARM: a multivariate temporal-contextual adaptive learning method, which is an enhanced architecture specifically designed for multivariate LTSF modelling. ARM employs Adaptive Univariate Effect Learning (AUEL), Random Dropping (RD) training strategy, and Multi-kernel Local Smoothing (MKLS), to better handle individual series temporal patterns and correctly learn inter-series dependencies. ARM demonstrates superior performance on multiple benchmarks without significantly increasing computational costs compared to vanilla Transformer, thereby advancing the state-of-the-art in LTSF. ARM is also generally applicable to other LTSF architecture beyond vanilla Transformer.

Experience replay is a key component in reinforcement learning for stabilizing learning and improving sample efficiency. Its typical implementation samples transitions with replacement from a replay buffer. In contrast, in supervised learning with a fixed dataset, it is a common practice to shuffle the dataset every epoch and consume data sequentially, which is called random reshuffling (RR). RR enjoys theoretically better convergence properties and has been shown to outperform with-replacement sampling empirically. To leverage the benefits of RR in reinforcement learning, we propose sampling methods that extend RR to experience replay, both in uniform and prioritized settings. We evaluate our sampling methods on Atari benchmarks, demonstrating their effectiveness in deep reinforcement learning.

Randomized controlled trials are susceptible to imbalance on covariates predictive of the outcome. Rerandomization and deterministic treatment assignment are two proposed solutions. This paper explores the relationship between rerandomization and deterministic assignment, showing how deterministic assignment is an extreme case of rerandomization. The paper argues that in small experiments, both fully randomized and fully deterministic assignment have limitations. Instead, the researcher should consider setting the rerandomization acceptance probability based on an analysis of covariates and assumptions about the data structure to achieve an optimal alignment between randomness and balance. This allows for the calculation of minimum p-values along with valid permutation tests and fiducial intervals. The paper also introduces tools, including a new, open-source R package named fastrerandomize, to implement rerandomization and explore options for optimal rerandomization acceptance thresholds.