Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2608.23221

Which Histories Matter for Time Series Forecasting? Learning Predictive Relevance with Future Supervision

Abstract

Historical retrieval for time-series prediction commonly treats past similarity as a proxy for usefulness. We ask a different question: which historical examples should be expected to matter for a query? We define predictive relevance as expected future utility conditioned on inference-time information, using realized futures only during training as privileged supervision. A normalized-pattern retriever first forms a coarse candidate set, and a lightweight residual multilayer perceptron (MLP) learns a listwise future-compatibility target while keeping inference-time scoring strictly past-only. Our method retains similarity-based candidate generation but reranks its candidates by a more predictive relevance criterion. Optimal relevance decomposes into candidate-level utility and query-specific compatibility, motivating Candidate-Prior and Shuffled-Future controls. Across six benchmarks, the reranker improves Pattern retrieval while revealing candidate-global, query-specific, and mixed relevance regimes. On all 12 confirmatory tasks, it improves Pattern and outperforms a matched-protocol Stationarity-Aware Retrieval-Augmented Time Series Forecasting (SARAF) retrieval rule. Architecture-matched ablations show that correct future supervision, rather than the MLP or added context alone, drives gains in query-specific regimes. Alternative-similarity experiments show that a strong last-value-anchored L2 rule remains superior in some domains, whereas future-supervised relevance is particularly strong where our diagnostics indicate query-specific relevance, especially on Solar. Candidate-pool diagnostics show that this contrast is not explained solely by coarse Pattern retrieval. Overall, historical relevance is structured and domain dependent rather than governed by a universally superior retrieval rule.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Yong-Hoon Choi, Kwang-Hyun Park, Youngjin Cho. 2026-09-16. Which Histories Matter for Time Series Forecasting? Learning Predictive Relevance with Future Supervision. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.23221

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Parameterized Dense-Sparse Fusion for Hybrid Retrieval: Tuning a Rank-Score Mix on BEIR SciFact with Qdrant

We study a parameterized hybrid ranker that fuses a dense embedding list and a sparse lexical list. The method has a small, explicit parameter vector: a dense prior $α\in [0,1]$, a score-versus-rank mix $λ\in [0,1]$, an RRF smoothing parameter $κ> 0$, optional list-geometry coefficients that move $α$ per query, and a router margin $τ$ that can turn sparse search off. We grid-search those ranges on SciFact train (809 queries) and freeze the chosen values on SciFact test (300). The tuned rank-score mix ($α= 0.8$, $λ= 0.75$, $κ= 20$) reaches 0.753 nDCG@10 and 0.889 recall@10, outperforming dense BGE (0.742 / 0.871) and equal-weight RRF (0.707 nDCG@10) on that test split. A list-conditioned $α$ adds +0.0006 nDCG; a sparse-off router is rejected by the same train split (any $τ$ that skipped approximately 50% of queries lost nDCG). These coefficients are dataset-specific. Equal RRF with the same models does not beat dense on a nine-zip BEIR macro-average (0.479 vs. 0.519 nDCG@10). Repeating the same train-then-freeze sweep independently on all 20 indexed units beats equal RRF on 20/20 and dense on 16/20 (unit-mean nDCG@10 0.467 vs. 0.462 dense vs. 0.420 RRF). Other corpora should reuse the ranges, not a copy of the SciFact point.

cs.IR

From Ranked Documents to Reliable Contexts: An Answer-Oriented Context Construct Framework for AI Search

Traditional Web search follows a human-facing paradigm in which users inspect ranked documents and synthesize information themselves. In AI Search, retrieved documents instead serve as inputs to a generation model, shifting the retrieval objective from ranking documents by Search Satisfaction to constructing reliable context for correct answer generation. We formulate this shift as answer-oriented context construction through a three-stage framework: (1) Answer Support identifies candidate documents that contribute information to answer generation; (2) Content Trustworthiness assesses whether this information provides a reliable basis for correct answers from source, temporal, and factual perspectives; and (3) Context Organization selects, consolidates, and structures retained information under a finite context budget for consistent and robust generation. We further develop an industrial workflow spanning prior and posterior optimization and establish a systematic evaluation protocol covering both retrieval-side context and final answers. Experiments show consistent improvements at both Retrieval and Answer levels, demonstrating the effectiveness of the framework and its industrial implementation.

cs.IR

Robust Fusion of Semantic and Behavioural Signals for LLM Reranking in Personalised Search

Personalised search must satisfy query intent while incorporating user context and historical interactions. LLM-based cross-encoders provide a single reranking interface, but injecting predictive behavioural statistics into their prompts can encourage shortcut learning: reliance on historical signals at the expense of semantic and user-context patterns that generalise to sparse or unseen searches. We study this problem in the personalised search system of a large-scale audio streaming platform using Query Slice Stats (QSS), an interaction-derived behavioural feature summarising historical success for query-candidate pairs. Naive QSS injection improves ranking when the feature is available but reduces robustness when it is removed. We address this with deterministic dual-sample feature-dropout training, which presents each example once with QSS included and once with QSS removed. Offline, QSS injection improves ranking quality by 13.3% when available. Dual-sample training preserves these gains while improving performance under QSS-removed evaluation by 4.0% relative to naive QSS training. In a live online test, both QSS-aware variants improve search success by roughly 2%. The aggregate test does not distinguish dual-sample from features-only training; the cold-start comparison is directionally consistent with the offline results. Paired feature-present and feature-removed training can therefore reduce the tension between exploiting strong behavioural statistics and remaining robust when they are unavailable.

cs.IR