Recent works for time-series forecasting more and more leverage the high predictive power of Deep Learning models. With this increase in model complexity, however, comes a lack in understanding of the underlying model decision process, which is problematic for high-stakes decision making. At the same time, simple, interpretable forecasting methods such as Linear Models can still perform very well, sometimes on-par, with Deep Learning approaches. We argue that simple models are good enough most of the time, and forecasting performance can be improved by choosing a Deep Learning method only for certain predictions, increasing the overall interpretability of the forecasting process. In this context, we propose a novel online model selection framework which uses meta-learning to identify these predictions and only rarely uses a non-interpretable, large model. An extensive empirical study on various real-world datasets shows that our selection methodology outperforms state-of-the-art online model selections methods in most cases. We find that almost always choosing a simple Linear Model for forecasting results in competitive performance, suggesting that the need for opaque black-box models in time-series forecasting is smaller than recent works would suggest.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Recent works for time-series forecasting more and more leverage the high predictive power of Deep Learning models. With this increase in model complexity, however, comes a lack in understanding of the underlying model decision process, which is problematic for high-stakes decision making. At the same time, simple, interpretable forecasting methods such as Linear Models can still perform very well, sometimes on-par, with Deep Learning approaches. We argue that simple models […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":12,"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"publication-type":[30],"class_list":["post-32591","publication","type-publication","status-publish","hentry","publication-type-article"],"acf":[],"publishpress_future_workflow_manual_trigger":{"enabledWorkflows":[]},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/32591","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/publication"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/12"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/32591\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=32591"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"publication-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication-type?post=32591"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}