What Does History Add? Calendar Controls and Information-Timing Audits for University Trajectory Forecasting

Zepei Cao

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.21419

What Does History Add? Calendar Controls and Information-Timing Audits for University Trajectory Forecasting

Zepei Cao

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We audit the predictive value of historical summaries in a rule-based university trajectory simulator. Seventeen ridge specifications and persistence separate current plans, past-state and past-plan summaries, and calendar-only history-length indicators. Across training, validation and two family-held-out evaluations, we reconstruct 16,750 routes and 804,000 monthly records. On the original 40-family set, six-month history lowers six-step normalized RMSE from 0.159234 to 0.151522, but its difference from a length-only control is -0.000895 (descriptive paired 95% interval [-0.001957,0.000248]). Fixed weights on 30 families unused in identified prior tasks reproduce this pattern: 0.156480 to 0.150074 versus current-state prediction, but -0.000558 [-0.001783,0.000728] versus the length control. These uncertain comparisons do not generalize to all-history summaries, which improve on their own calendar control. Exploratory decomposition finds clearer preparation-index and funds benefits, whereas fatigue dominates the six-month model's loss and has an uncertain length-controlled benefit. Moreover, 28.20% of its six-step fatigue predictions violate the simulator's [5,90] support. We document family dependence, prior exposure, strict temporal indexing, matched recursive references and independent numerical replay. The task conditions on recorded future plans; it does not evaluate real-student forecasts, causal action effects, autonomous planning or language-model memory. This is an evaluation audit, not a new memory architecture.

Explore related subjects

cs.LG

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Zepei Cao. 2026-10-15. What Does History Add? Calendar Controls and Information-Timing Audits for University Trajectory Forecasting. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.21419

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

The Re-Label Method For Data-Centric Machine Learning

In industry deep learning application, our manually labeled data has a certain number of noisy data. To solve this problem and achieve more than 90 score in dev dataset, we present a simple method to find the noisy data and re-label the noisy data by human, given the model predictions as references in human labeling. In this paper, we illustrate our idea for a broad set of deep learning tasks, includes classification, sequence tagging, object detection, sequence generation, click-through rate prediction. The dev dataset evaluation results and human evaluation results verify our idea.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

DeFlow: Decoupling Behavior-Prior Modeling and Value Maximization for Offline Policy Extraction

We present DeFlow, a decoupled offline RL framework that leverages flow matching to faithfully capture complex behavior manifolds. Optimizing generative policies is computationally prohibitive, typically necessitating backpropagation through ODE solvers. We address this by learning a lightweight refinement module within an explicit, data-derived trust region of the flow manifold, rather than sacrificing the iterative generation capability via single-step distillation. This way, we bypass solver differentiation and eliminate the need for balancing loss terms, ensuring stable improvement while fully preserving the flow's iterative expressivity. Empirically, DeFlow achieves superior performance on the challenging OGBench benchmark and demonstrates efficient offline-to-online adaptation.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

CoCopula: Conformal Calibration and Copula Aggregation for Reliable Renewable Energy Forecasting

The rapid growth of renewable energy penetration has intensified the need for reliable probabilistic forecasts to support grid operations at aggregated (fleet or system) levels. In practice, however, system operators often lack access to fleet-level probabilistic models and instead rely on site-level forecasts produced by heterogeneous third-party providers. Constructing coherent and calibrated fleet-level probabilistic forecasts from such inputs remains challenging due to complex cross-site dependencies and aggregation-induced miscalibration. Motivated by a real-world operational challenge identified through collaboration with an industry partner, this paper presents a probabilistic aggregation and calibration framework that directly converts site-level probabilistic forecasts into reliable fleet-level forecasts. The paper introduces \method~ (\textbf{Co}nformal Calibration and \textbf{Copula} Aggregation), which integrates Copula-based dependence modeling to capture cross-site correlations followed by Context-Aware Conformal Prediction (CACP) to mitigate miscalibration at the aggregated level. This combination enables dependence-aware aggregation while improving empirical coverage and maintaining sharp prediction intervals. Experiments on large-scale solar generation datasets from three system operators in the United States including MISO, ERCOT, and SPP demonstrate that the proposed \method{} approach achieves near-nominal empirical coverage and consistently lower Winkler scores than competing aggregation-based baselines across different target coverage levels. Importantly, \method{} achieves performance comparable to directly calibrated system-level forecasts, demonstrating its practical value when dedicated fleet-level forecasting models are unavailable.

cs.LG↗