The DOI matches its Crossref record; 142 of the 149 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 1 of the 84 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Deep learning for time series classification: a review
Open accessOverview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This review empirically compares nine end-to-end deep learning architectures for time series classification across 97 univariate and multivariate datasets, training 8,730 models. It finds that a deep residual network (ResNet) is the strongest DNN, significantly outperforming most other deep models and reaching performance not significantly different from COTE/HIVE-COTE on the UCR/UEA archive.
Key findings
- ResNet significantly outperformed the other deep learning approaches on the 85 univariate UCR/UEA datasets, with an average rank of almost 2, winning on 50 out of 85 problems; FCN and Encoder followed as second and third.
- ResNet was not significantly different from COTE/HIVE-COTE in pairwise statistical tests, while NN-DTW-WW and EE showed the lowest average ranks among compared state-of-the-art methods.
- MCNN and t-LeNet, which use window slicing/subsequence extraction, yielded very low accuracies with only one win (Earthquakes); MCDCNN and Time-CNN performed similarly to MLP.
- ResNet was more stable across random initializations than FCN, with average standard deviation 1.48 versus 1.70; on DiatomSizeReduction, ResNet and FCN reached only 30% accuracy while Time-CNN reached 95%.
Methods
- The authors reimplemented nine discriminative end-to-end deep learning models (MLP, FCN, ResNet, Encoder, MCNN, t-LeNet, MCDCNN, Time-CNN, TWIESN) in a common Keras/TensorFlow framework and trained each with 10 random initializations on 97 datasets: 85 univariate UCR/UEA datasets and 12 multivariate datasets.
- In total, 8,730 experiments were run on a cluster of 60 GPUs; accuracy was averaged over the 10 runs, and comparisons with published state-of-the-art results used median test error.
- Statistical comparison used the Friedman test followed by pairwise Wilcoxon signed-rank tests with Holm’s alpha correction (5%), visualized with critical difference diagrams.
Limitations
- The paper states that generative models and models using hand-engineered features were excluded, and that transfer learning, data augmentation, training/testing time, and normalization effects were not thoroughly studied.
- The paper acknowledges that non-deep state-of-the-art algorithms were not trained or tuned by the authors, so the comparison may favor DNNs; it also notes that the compared architectures may have been overfitted or empirically designed for the UCR/UEA archive.
- Evident from the text: the multivariate archive contains only 12 datasets, and the statistical test failed to find significant differences among the nine classifiers on that archive; ResNet’s hyperparameters were not tuned per dataset, and random initialization can significantly affect DNN accuracy.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
63 Not checked yet · 47 Own interpretation · 44 Own result · 22 No basis given · 6 Own method · 1 Supported so far
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Hills et al. (2014) introduced a shapelet transformation based approach that discovered shapelets that are similar to the ones identified by Ye and Keogh (2011).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hills et al. (2014) source
- Supportedcites Ye and Keogh (2011) source
The citation to Ye and Keogh (2011) identifies the earlier shapelets, rather than sourcing the description of Hills et al.’s later approach. Section 5.1.1 says Ye and Keogh reported shapelets from their experiments; Section 3 describes how they found them. The paper is not being cited as evidence of a comparison with the later work. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“our experiments showed that not only DNNs are able to significantly outperform the NN-DTW, but are also able to achieve results that are not significantly different than COTE and HIVE-COTE using a deep residual network architecture (He et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2017b).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites He et al., 2016
- Not checked yetcites Wang et al., 2017b
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The UCR/UEA archive datasets are representative of TSC problems.
- Rests on an assumption: The deep learning implementations in the framework faithfully represent the original methods.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“our experiments showed that not only DNNs are able to significantly outperform the NN-DTW, but are also able to achieve results that are not significantly different than COTE and HIVE-COTE using a deep residual network architecture (He et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2017b).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites He et al., 2016
- Not checked yetcites Wang et al., 2017b
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The UCR/UEA archive datasets are representative of TSC problems.
- Rests on an assumption: The deep learning implementations in the framework faithfully represent the original methods.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, one of the advantages of FCNs is the invariance (denoted by # invar in Table 1) in the number of parameters for 4 layers (out of 5) across time series of different lengths.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We should note that twenty datasets contains a relatively small training set (50 or fewer instances) which surprisingly was not an impediment for obtaining high accuracy when applying a very deep architecture such as ResNet.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During our study, we found that CNN is the most widely applied architecture for the TSC problem”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In our experiments, when comparing to state-of-the-art algorithms, we have encountered this problem with (ResNet > COTE > HIVE- COTE).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“where the statistical test failed to find any significant difference between the nine classifiers”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and significantly outperforms the FCN architecture.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One exception is the electrocardiography (ECG) datasets (7 in total) where ResNet was drastically beaten by the FCN model in 71.4% of ECG datasets.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 47
- It may state two separate claims as one. 52
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, we analyze how poor random initializations can have a significant effect on a DNN's performance.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We can see that FCN does not hold any pooling nor a regularization operation.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly to the FCN model, the layers (except the final one) in the ResNet architecture have an invariant number of parameters across different datasets.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The ResNet significantly outperforms the other approaches with an average rank of almost 2.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This suggestion is also supported by the fact that Time-CNN is the smallest model: it contains a very small number of parameters by design with only 18 filters compared to the 512 filters of FCN.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Again, ResNet and FCN still dominate with not much of a difference.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“our empirical study strongly suggests to use ResNet instead of any other deep learning algorithm - it is the most accurate one with similar runtime to FCN (the second most accurate DNN).”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the datasets used in our experiments are relatively small compared to the billions of labeled images (such as ImageNet (Russakovsky et al., 2015) and OpenImages (Krasin et al., 2017) challenges), the deepest networks did reach competitive accuracies on the UCR/UEA archive benchmark.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The MCNN and t-LeNet architectures yielded very low accuracies with only one win for the Earthquakes dataset.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“FCN wins on 36 datasets whereases Encoder wins only on 17”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“ResNet and FCN achieved the worst accuracy (30%) on this dataset while Time-CNN reached the best accuracy (95%).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, TWIESN did reach competitive accuracies on several long time series datasets such as reaching a 96.8% accuracy on Meat whose time series length is equal to 448.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, our results show that, on average, ResNet is the best architecture with FCN and Encoder following as second and third respectively.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other words, FCN's learned representation has too many data points close to the decision boundary whereas ResNet's hidden features enables projecting data points further away from the decision boundary.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: MDS plots with Euclidean distance on GAP vectors preserve class separability sufficiently to interpret model performance.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which is evident by the relatively low accuracy of both models FCN and ResNet which is equal respectively to 58.7% and 74.4%.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other words, FCN's CAM contains much more smoother regions with cyan, green and yellow regions, whereas ResNet's CAM contains more dark red and blue subsequences”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“ResNet performed very well in general except for the ECG datasets where it was outperformed by FCN.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other words, the weight's initial value can easily decrease the accuracy of FCN whereas ResNet maintained a relatively high accuracy when taking the worst initial weight values.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We found small variance between the approaches that replace the GAP layer with an FC dense layer (MCDCNN, CNN) which also showed similar performance to TWIESN and MLP.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We note that both deep learning models (FCN and ResNet) managed to project the data from GunPoint into a linearly separable space”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: MDS plots with Euclidean distance on GAP vectors preserve class separability sufficiently to interpret model performance.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we observed in our experiments, that DNNs for TSC suffer from a significant decrease (increase) in accuracy when initialized with bad (good) random weights.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“DNNs have indeed revolutionized the field of computer vision especially with the advent of novel deeper architectures such as Residual and Convolutional Neural Networks.”
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain
“Deep Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) have revolutionized the field of computer vision (Krizhevsky et al., 2012).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Krizhevsky et al., 2012
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“To achieve its high accuracy, HIVE-COTE becomes hugely computationally intensive and impractical to run on a real big data mining problem (Bagnall et al., 2017).”
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · hedged
“The approach requires training 37 classifiers as well as cross-validating each hyperparameter of these algorithms, which makes the approach infeasible to train in some situations (Lucas et al., 2018).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bagnall et al., 2017 source
- Not checked yetcites Lucas et al., 2018
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · hedged
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Apart from images, sequential data such as text and audio can also be processed with DNNs to reach state-of-the-art performance for document classification and speech recognition.”
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain
“Following the success of deep neural networks (DNNs) in computer vision, a huge amount of research proposed several DNN architectures to solve natural language processing (NLP) tasks such as machine translation (Sutskever et al., 2014; Bahdanau et al., 2015), learning word embeddings (Mikolov et al., 2013; Mikolov et al., 2013) and document classification (Le and Mikolov, 2014; Goldberg, 2016). DN”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sutskever et al., 2014
- Not checked yetcites Hinton et al., 2012 source
- Not checked yetcites Le and Mikolov, 2014
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Once we have established that a statistical difference exists within the classifiers' performance, we followed the pairwise post-hoc analysis recommended by Benavoli et al. (2016) where the average rank comparison is replaced by a Wilcoxon signed-rank test (Wilcoxon, 1945) with Holm's alpha correction (Holm, 1979; Garcia and Herrera, 2008).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Benavoli et al., 2016
- Not checked yetcites Wilcoxon, 1945 source
- Not checked yetcites Holm, 1979
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The multivariate evaluation shows another benefit of deep learning models, which is the ability to handle the curse of dimensionality (Bellman, 2010; Keogh and Mueen, 2017) by leveraging different degrees of smoothness in compositional function (Poggio et al., 2017) as well as the parallel computations of the GPUs (Lu et al., 2015).”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The UCR/UEA archive datasets are representative of TSC problems.
In the paper
“Apart from time series forecasting, we found that these neural networks were rarely applied for time series classification which is mainly due to three factors: (1) the type of this architecture is designed mainly to predict an output for each element (time stamp) in the time series (L¨ angkvist et al., 2014);”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites L¨ angkvist et al., 2014
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“(3) RNNs are considered hard to train and parallelize which led the researchers to avoid using them for computational reasons (Pascanu et al., 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Pascanu et al., 2013
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They were designed to mitigate the challenges of RNNs by eliminating the need to compute the gradient for the hidden layers which reduces the training time of these neural networks thus avoiding the vanishing gradient problem.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Gallicchio and Micheli, 2017
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This is surprising as deep learning has seen very successful applications in the last years.”
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain
“After having established the current state-of-the-art of non deep classifiers for TSC (Bagnall et al., 2017), we discuss the success of Deep Learning (LeCun et al., 2015) in various classification tasks which motivated the recent utilization of deep learning models for TSC (Wang et al., 2017b).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites LeCun et al., 2015 source
- Not checked yetcites Wang et al., 2017b
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain
In the paper
“Deep learning approaches for TSC can be separated into two main categories: the generative and the discriminative models (as proposed in L¨ angkvist et al. (2014)).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites L¨ angkvist et al., 2014
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As for comparing the classifiers over multiple datasets, we followed the recommendations in Demˇ sar (2006) and used the Friedman test (Friedman, 1940) to reject the null hypothesis.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Demˇ sar, 2006
- Not checked yetcites Friedman, 1940 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Generative models usually exhibit an unsupervised training step that precedes the learning phase of the classifier (L¨ angkvist et al., 2014).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites L¨ angkvist et al., 2014
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, adding to the huge runtime of HIVE-COTE, the decision taken by 37 classifiers cannot be interpreted easily by domain experts, since researchers already struggle with understanding the decisions taken by an individual classifier.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“MLP does not have any layer whose number of parameters is invariant across time series of different lengths (denoted by # invar in Table 1) which means that the transferability of the network is not trivial: the number of parameters (weights) of the network depends directly on the length of the input time series.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“One final note is that the careful design of Encoder's attention mechanism enabled the invariance across all layers which encouraged the authors to implement a transfer learning approach.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Serr` a et al., 2018
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Residual Networks (ResNets) (Wang et al., 2017b; Geng and Luo, 2018) which add linear shortcut connections for the convolutional layers potentially enhancing the model's accuracy (He et al., 2016).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites He et al., 2016
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“To measure the performance of the model on the test data (generalization), we adopted the accuracy measure (similarly to Bagnall et al. (2017)).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bagnall et al., 2017 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Although ESNs were originally proposed for time series forecasting, Tanisaro and Heidemann (2016) proposed a variant of ESNs that uses directly the raw input time series and predicts a probability distribution over the class variables.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Tanisaro and Heidemann, 2016
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In addition, one of the main characteristics of this architecture is the replacement of the traditional final FC layer with a Global Average Pooling (GAP) layer which reduces drastically the number of parameters in a neural network while enabling the use of the CAM (Zhou et al., 2016) that highlights which parts of the input time series contributed the most to a certain classification.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Zhou et al., 2016
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The latter approach reached higher accuracy thus benefiting from the transfer learning technique.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Serr` a et al., 2018
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In contrast to feature engineering, end-to-end deep learning aims to incorporate the feature learning process while fine-tuning the discriminative classifier (Nweke et al., 2018).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Nweke et al., 2018 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which is probably due to their robustness and the relatively small amount of training time compared to complex architectures such as RNNs or MLPs.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For memory usage limitations over a single GPU, we left the MTS dataset Performance Measurement System (PeMS) out of our experimentations.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unlike ResNet and FCN, this approach does not have much invariant layers (2 out of 4) due to the use of an FC layer instead of a GAP layer, thus increasing drastically the number of parameters needed to be trained which also depends on the length of the input time series.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This has also been the consensus in the human activity recognition literature, where the accuracy of deep learning methods depends highly on the quality of the extracted features (Nweke et al., 2018).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Nweke et al., 2018 source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“We also evaluated all deep learning models on Baydogan's archive (Baydogan, 2015) that contains 13 MTS classification datasets.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Baydogan, 2015
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, any deep learning algorithm can benefit from this type of modification.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That being said, we can easily pre-train a model on a source dataset, then transfer and fine-tune it on a target dataset without having to modify the hidden layers of the network.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This archive also exhibits datasets with different characteristics such as the length of the time series which, unlike the UCR/UEA archive, varies among the same dataset. This is due to the fact that the datasets in the UCR/UEA archive are already re-scaled to have an equal length among one dataset (Bagnall et al., 2017).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bagnall et al., 2017 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“FCNs are mainly convolutional networks that do not contain any local pooling layers which means that the length of a time series is kept unchanged throughout the convolutions.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Cui et al. (2016) were the first to introduce the Window Slicing (WS) method as a data augmentation technique.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Cui et al., 2016
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Actually, the difference with the usual convolutions (such as in FCNs) is that a linear shortcut is added to link the output of a residual block to its input thus enabling the flow of the gradient directly through these connections, which makes training a DNN much easier by reducing the vanishing gradient effect (He et al., 2016).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites He et al., 2016
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The problem with an MLP approach is that temporal information is lost and the features learned are no longer time-invariant.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“We made this choice because we believe that the main goal of deep learning approaches is to remove the bias due to manually designed features (Ord´ o¨ nez and Roggen, 2016), thus enabling the network to learn the most discriminant useful features for the classification task.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Ord´ o¨ nez and Roggen, 2016
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This form of pre-processing has also been used by Ratanamahatana and Keogh (2005) to show that the length of a time series is not an issue for TSC problems.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Ratanamahatana and Keogh (2005)
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By using an FC layer before the softmax classifier, the transferability of this network is limited to the first and second convolutional layers.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The first characteristic of Time-CNN is the use of the mean squared error (MSE) instead of the traditional categorical cross-entropy loss function, which has been used by all the deep learning approaches we have mentioned so far. Hence, instead of a softmax classifier, the final layer is a traditional FC layer with sigmoid as the activation function, which does not guarantee a sum of probabilities”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unlike GAP, local pooling introduces invariance to small perturbations in the activation map (the result of a convolution) by taking the maximum value in a local pooling window.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since we did not train nor test any of the state-of-the-art non deep learning algorithms, it is possible that we allowed much more training time for the described DNNs.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“our findings are in agreement with the deep learning for computer vision literature where deeper neural networks are much more successful than shallower architectures (He et al., 2016).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites He et al., 2016
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Interestingly, DiatomSizeReduction is the smallest datasets in the UCR/UEA archive (with 16 training instances), which suggests that ResNet and FCN are easily overfitting this dataset.”
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This step is very important for deep learning models whose architecture depends on the length of the input time series (such as a MLP) and for parallel computation over the GPUs.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The MTS archive contains time series of unequal length.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition to the huge training time, HIVE-COTE's classification time is bounded by a linear scan of the training set due to employing a nearest neighbor classifier, whereas the trivial GPU parallelization of DNNs provides instant classification.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“since increasing the number of convolutional layers will increase the path length viewed by the CNN model (Vaswani et al., 2017), ResNet and FCN managed to outperform other approaches whose filter length is longer (21) such as Encoder.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Vaswani et al., 2017
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This FC layer reduces the effect of learning time invariant features which explains why MLP, Time-CNN and MCDCNN exhibit very similar performance.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, we believe that allowing a much more thorough search of DTW's warping window would lead to a fairer comparison between deep learning approaches and other state-of-the-art TSC algorithms.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“unlike HIVE-COTE, ResNet's hyperparameters were not tuned for each dataset but rather the same architecture was used for the whole benchmark”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One final observation that is in agreement with the deep learning literature is that in order to achieve high accuracies while training a DNN, a large training set is needed.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“suggesting that these methods are no longer competitive with current state-of-the-art algorithms for TSC.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“suggesting further investigation of these hyperparameters should improve DNNs' accuracy for TSC.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it is only natural to think that discovering patterns in a one dimensional space (time) should be an easier task for CNNs thus requiring less data to learn from.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which enables us to take the mean accuracy over the 10 runs in order to reduce the bias due to the weights' initial values.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“for a lazy machine learning algorithm such as NN-DTW, training time is zero when allowing maximum warping whereas it has been shown that judicially setting the warping window Dau et al. (2017) can lead to a significant increase in accuracy.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dau et al., 2017
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These observations reinforces the need to have an equally large MTS classification archive in order to evaluate hybrid univariate/multivariate time series classifiers.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“but the fact that ResNet is not significantly different than COTE suggests that more datasets would give a better insight into these performances (Demˇ sar, 2006).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Demˇ sar, 2006
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“It is worthwhile noting that cliques formed by the Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test with Holm's alpha correction do not necessary reflect the rank order (Lines et al., 2018).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lines et al., 2018 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although Time-CNN and MCDCNN are the only architectures originally proposed for MTS data”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We believe that the success of ResNet is highly due to its deep flexible architecture.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“especially since normalization is known to have a huge effect on DNNs' learning capabilities (Zhang et al., 2017).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Zhang et al., 2017
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which probably explains why FCN is less accurate than ResNet on this dataset.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Rests on an assumption: CAM visualizations faithfully indicate which time series regions contribute to class identification.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In fact, most DNNs architectures, with the categorical cross-entropy as their cost function, employ mainly the same classifier: softmax which is basically designed for multi-class classification.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“we stress that the shapelet transformation classifier (Hills et al., 2014) is an ensemble approach, which makes unclear how the shapelets affect the decision taken by the individual classifiers whereas for an end-to-end deep learning model we can directly explain the classification by using the Class Activation Map.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hills et al., 2014 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand, the part where the actor raises his/her arm seems to be also a discriminative part of the data which suggests that the deep learning algorithms are identifying more 'shapelets'.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, another interesting observation is the ability of CNNs to localize a given discriminative shape regardless where it appears in the time series, which is evidence for CNNs' capability of learning time-invariant warped features.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We should note that this observation cannot confirm which classifier extracted the most discriminative subsequences especially because all algorithms achieved similar accuracy on GunPoint dataset.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
The UCR/UEA archive datasets are representative of TSC problems.
“we tested the approaches on 12 Multivariate Time Series (MTS) datasets (Baydogan, 2015).”
The paper relies on this without support.
The 97 time series datasets used are sufficient to generalize about DNN performance for TSC.
“By training 8,730 deep learning models on 97 time series datasets, we propose the most exhaustive study of DNNs for TSC to date.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The deep learning implementations in the framework faithfully represent the original methods.
“We also provide an open source deep learning framework to the TSC community where we implemented each of the compared approaches and evaluated them on a univariate TSC benchmark (the UCR/UEA archive) and 12 multivariate time series datasets.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The MTS archive contains time series of unequal length.
“In order to solve the problem of unequal length time series in the MTS archive”
The paper relies on this without support.
CAM visualizations faithfully indicate which time series regions contribute to class identification.
“Highlighting with the Class Activation Map the contribution of each time series region for the three classes in Meat when using the FCN and ResNet classifiers.”
The paper relies on this without support.
MDS plots with Euclidean distance on GAP vectors preserve class separability sufficiently to interpret model performance.
“Figure 15 shows three MDS plots for the GunPoint dataset using: (1) the raw input time series (Figure 15a); (2) the learned latent features from the GAP layer for FCN (Figure 15b); and (3)”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“These approaches, categorized as temporal representation[105,106], divide the entire framework into two stages: “temporal representation” and “temporal prediction.””
From Advancements in the estimation of the state of charge of lithium-ion battery: a comprehensive review of traditional and deep learning approaches (2025) · cites this paper as [105]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These include the high computational cost incurred by running multiple instances [18,19]”
From TVGeAN: Tensor Visibility Graph-Enhanced Attention Network for Versatile Multivariant Time Series Learning Tasks (2024) · cites this paper as [19]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ 4.1.1 Univariate archive · p. 21
“| WalkVsRun | 128-1918 | 1919 | 2 | 62 | 28 | 16 |”
§ 4.1.2 Multivariate archive · p. 21
“thus each time series will have a length equal to the longest time series' length.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ 3.2.1 Multi Layer Perceptron · p. 14
“MLP does not have any layer whose number of parameters is invariant across time series of different lengths”
§ 3.2.1 Multi Layer Perceptron · p. 14
“All three hidden FC layers are composed of 500 neurons with ReLU as the activation function.”
Citations
Cites
Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2016.90 · Cited by 235,474 · cited 12×
“First of all, our findings are in agreement with the deep learning for computer vision literature where deeper 1 The implementations are available on https://github.com/hfawaz/dl-4-tsc neural networks are much more successful than shallower architectures (He et al., 2016).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialVaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, L., & Polosukhin, I. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.03762 · Cited by 120,404 · cited 4×
“The MLP, which is the most traditional form of DNNs, was proposed in Wang et al. (2017b) as a baseline architecture for TSC.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks
Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I., & Hinton, G. E. (2017) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/3065386 · Cited by 112,155 · cited 7×
“Since AlexNet (Krizhevsky et al. 2012) won the ImageNet competition in 2012, deep CNNs have seen a lot of successful applications in many different domains (LeCun et al.”
BackgroundInfluentialAdam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization
Kingma, D. P., & Ba, J. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1412.6980 · Cited by 98,946 · cited 1×
“All models were optimized using a variant of Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) such as Adam (Kingma and Ba, 2015) and AdaDelta (Zeiler, 2012).”
MethodLeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14539 · Cited by 84,126
Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition
Lecun, Y., Bottou, L., Bengio, Y., & Haffner, P. (1998) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/5.726791 · Cited by 58,805
Going deeper with convolutions
Szegedy, C., Liu, W., Jia, Y., Sermanet, P., Reed, S., Anguelov, D., Erhan, D., Vanhoucke, V., & Rabinovich, A. (2015) · 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2015.7298594 · Cited by 48,562
ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge
Russakovsky, O., Deng, J., Su, H., Krause, J., Satheesh, S., Ma, S., Huang, Z., Karpathy, A., Khosla, A., Bernstein, M., et al. (2015) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1007/s11263-015-0816-y · Cited by 39,380
(2014) · Cited by 33,419
Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shift
Ioffe, S., & Szegedy, C. (2015) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1502.03167 · Cited by 27,818
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Che Z, He X, Xu K, Liu Y (2017b) DECADE: a deep metric learning model for multivariate time series. In: KDD workshop on mining and learning from time series
- Ismail Fawaz H, Forestier G, Weber J, Idoumghar L, Muller PA (2018c) Transfer learning for time series classification. In: IEEE international conference on big data, pp 1367–1376 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 901–1,000 of 1,007
Troullinou, E., Tsagkatakis, G., Chavlis, S., Turi, G. F., Li, W., Losonczy, A., Tsakalides, P., & Poirazi, P. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computational Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tetci.2020.3028581 · Cited by 16
Incremental and Adaptive Feature Exploration over Time Series Stream
Zuo, J., Zeitouni, K., & Taher, Y. (2019) · IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData) · doi:10.1109/bigdata47090.2019.9005660 · Cited by 15
“Recent Deep Neural Network (DNN) approaches [24]–[27] on TSC are capable of tuning the model incrementally, but stay always in an awkward position for the lack of explainability, which is required by domains like healthcare where questions of accountability and transparency are particularly important.”
seq2graph: Discovering Dynamic Non-linear Dependencies from Multivariate Time Series
Dang, X. H., Shah, S. Y., & Zerfos, P. (2019) · IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData) · doi:10.1109/bigdata47090.2019.9006103 · Cited by 15
“The second category consists of techniques based on artificial neural networks (ANN) [22], [23].”
MethodEstimation of Learners’ Engagement Using Face and Body Features by Transfer Learning
Zheng, X., Hasegawa, S., Tran, M.-T., Ota, K., & Unoki, T. (2021) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-77772-2_36 · Cited by 15
TSInterpret: A Python Package for the Interpretability of Time Series Classification
Höllig, J., Kulbach, C., & Thoma, S. (2023) · The Journal of Open Source Software · doi:10.21105/joss.05220 · Cited by 16
“…learning methods have been successful in the field of Computer Vision (CV) and Natural Language Processing (NLP) for almost a decade, application on time series data has only occurred in the past few years (e.g., Fawaz et al., 2019; Rajkomar et al., 2018; Ruiz et al., 2021; Susto et al., 2018).”
BackgroundMethodLearning reservoir dynamics with temporal self-modulation
Sakemi, Y., Nobukawa, S., Matsuki, T., Morie, T., & Aihara, K. (2024) · Communications Physics · doi:10.1038/s42005-023-01500-w · Cited by 16
Deep-STaR: Classification of image time series based on spatio-temporal representations
Chelali, M., Kurtz, C., Puissant, A., & Vincent, N. (2021) · Computer Vision and Image Understanding · doi:10.1016/j.cviu.2021.103221 · Cited by 13
Predicting terrorist attacks in the United States using localized news data
Krieg, S. J., Smith, C. W., Chatterjee, R., & Chawla, N. V. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0270681 · Cited by 17
“We experimentally evaluated several other state-of-the-art neural network architectures, including models based on attention [34] and convolutions, which are often used in time series classification and have the benefit of being translation invariant [9].”
Uncertainty Assessment-Based Active Learning for Reliable Fire Detection Systems
Kim, Y.-J., & Kim, W.-T. (2022) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3190852 · Cited by 14
Tahan, M. H., Ghasemzadeh, M., & Asadi, S. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics · doi:10.1109/tii.2022.3188839 · Cited by 15
“not been used to increase the TSC accuracy in DL [7].”
MethodIPS: Instance Profile for Shapelet Discovery for Time Series Classification
Li, G., Choi, B. K. K., Xu, J., Bhowmick, S. S., Mah, D. N., & Wong, G. L. H. (2022) · IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE) · doi:10.1109/icde53745.2022.00179 · Cited by 14
“, an excellent survey of deep learning methods for TSC [12]).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialHybrid static-sensory data modeling for prediction tasks in basic oxygen furnace process
Sala, D. A., Deyne, A. V. Y.-D., Mannens, E., & Jalalvand, A. (2022) · Applied Intelligence · doi:10.1007/s10489-022-04293-7 · Cited by 16
“However taking into account correlations among the multivariate time series is much less common, even though multivariate extensions to these classic techniques do exist [2].”
BackgroundIn-situ animal behavior classification using knowledge distillation and fixed-point quantization
Arablouei, R., Wang, L., Phillips, C., Currie, L., Yates, J., & Bishop-Hurley, G. J. (2022) · Smart Agricultural Technology · doi:10.1016/j.atech.2022.100159 · Cited by 17
“We set the values of the hyperparameters of the ResNet model according to Table 1 of (Fawaz et al., 2019), which are shown to be optimal in different applications with various datasets.”
BackgroundMethodSnyder, S. J., Chu, E., Um, J., Heo, Y. J., Miller, R. H., & Shim, J. K. (2023) · The Knee · doi:10.1016/j.knee.2022.12.007 · Cited by 14
Towards an automated data cleaning with deep learning in CRESST
Angloher, G., Banik, S., Bartolot, D., Benato, G., Bento, A., Bertolini, A., Breier, R., Bucci, C., Burkhart, J., Canonica, L., et al. (2023) · The European Physical Journal Plus · doi:10.1140/epjp/s13360-023-03674-2 · Cited by 23
Dimensionality reduction and ensemble of LSTMs for antimicrobial resistance prediction
Carnerero, À. H., Sànchez–Marrè, M., Mora-Jiménez, I., Soguero-Ruíz, C., Martínez-Agüero, S., & Álvarez-Rodríguez, J. (2023) · Artificial Intelligence in Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.artmed.2023.102508 · Cited by 14
Towards a scalable discrete quantum generative adversarial neural network
Chaudhary, S., Huembeli, P., MacCormack, I., Patti, T. L., Kossaifi, J., & Galda, A. (2023) · Quantum Science and Technology · doi:10.1088/2058-9565/acc4e4 · Cited by 16
Graph Attention-Based Curriculum Learning for Mental Healthcare Classification
Ahmed, U., Lin, J. C., & Srivastava, G. (2023) · IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2023.3274486 · Cited by 14
Falanti, A., Lomurno, E., Ardagna, D., & Matteucci, M. (2023) · Applied Soft Computing · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110555 · Cited by 13
Vibration-based building health monitoring using spatio-temporal learning model
Dang, V.-H., & Pham, H.-A. (2023) · Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2023.106858 · Cited by 16
Data-driven time-variant reliability assessment of bridge girders based on deep learning
Xiao, Q., Liu, Y., Chen, C., Zhou, L., Liu, Z., Jiang, Z., Yang, B., & Tang, L. (2023) · Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures · doi:10.1080/15376494.2023.2253548 · Cited by 14
TRACE: Transformer-based continuous tracking framework using IoT and MCS
Mohammed, S. K., Singh, S., Mizouni, R., & Otrok, H. (2023) · Journal of Network and Computer Applications · doi:10.1016/j.jnca.2023.103793 · Cited by 13
Jain, P., Deshmukh, A., & Padole, H. P. (2024) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3354041 · Cited by 15
Prananto, B. H., Iskandar, I., Hendrawan, H., & Kurniawan, A. (2024) · IEICE Transactions on Communications · doi:10.23919/transcom.2023ebp3139 · Cited by 17
“There are so many methods to solve this time-series classification problem [49], including the deep learning approach using neural network [50].”
MethodStrategies to optimise machine learning classification performance when using biomechanical features
Liew, B. X. W., Pfisterer, F., Rügamer, D., & Zhai, X. (2024) · Journal of Biomechanics · doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2024.111998 · Cited by 16
Kim, H., Lee, S., Lee, W., Lee, W., & Son, Y. (2024) · Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2024.107980 · Cited by 14
Giuliani, G. (2024) · Big Earth Data · doi:10.1080/20964471.2024.2323241 · Cited by 14
“…methods where temporal relations between observed values of a time-series are considered like the Temporal Convolution Neural Network (tempCNN) or Lightweight Temporal Self-Attention Encoder (LTAE) (Cheng et al., 2023; Fawaz et al., 2018; Pelletier et al., 2019; Sainte Fare Garnot et al., 2020).”
Time Series Prediction Based on Multi-Scale Feature Extraction
Zhang, R., & Hao, Y. (2024) · Mathematics · doi:10.3390/math12070973 · Cited by 14
“…like stock market prices and meteorological changes. features and The data adaptability and processing capacity of these models on a large scale also compensate for the shortcomings of traditional methods [8]. pa tt erns, their di ffi culty in capturing global feature information is a limitation ].”
BackgroundSelf-learning of multivariate time series using perceptually important points
Lintonen, T., & Räty, T. (2019) · IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica · doi:10.1109/jas.2019.1911777 · Cited by 14
“Then, the CD diagram uses Wilcoxon-Holm posthoc analysis [35]–[37] to form the cliques (the thick horizontal lines).”
MethodEffects of the validation set on stock returns forecasting
Jerez, T., & Kristjanpoller, W. (2020) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113271 · Cited by 16
Benchmarking Deep Learning for Time Series: Challenges and Directions
Huang, X., Fox, G., Serebryakov, S., Mohan, A., Morkisz, P. M., & Dutta, D. (2019) · IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData) · doi:10.1109/bigdata47090.2019.9005496 · Cited by 14
“Not only is it competent in classical tasks such as forecasting [62], classification [7], and anomaly”
BackgroundQian, B., Su, J., Wen, Z., Jha, D. N., Li, Y., Guan, Y., Puthal, D., James, P., Yang, R., Zomaya, A. Y., et al. (2019) · White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.05433 · Cited by 15
Attention-Based Event Characterization for Scarce Vehicular Sensing Data
Taherifard, N., Şimşek, M., Lascelles, C., & Kantarcı, B. (2020) · IEEE Open Journal of Vehicular Technology · doi:10.1109/ojvt.2020.3024755 · Cited by 13
“more viable than before [12].”
Machine learning assisted network classification from symbolic time-series
Panday, A., Lee, W. S., Dutta, S., & Jalan, S. (2021) · Chaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science · doi:10.1063/5.0046406 · Cited by 14
Bhattacharya, C., & Ray, A. (2021) · Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing · doi:10.1016/j.ymssp.2021.108213 · Cited by 14
Wang, C.-C., Chen, J., Chen, Y., Tu, R.-H., Lee, J.-J., Xiao, Y.-X., & Cai, S.-Y. (2021) · ACM Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom) · doi:10.1145/3447993.3483264 · Cited by 14
Dharmadhikari, S., & Basak, A. (2021) · Machine Learning with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.mlwa.2021.100247 · Cited by 14
Coplanar-Gate Synaptic Transistor Array With Organic Electrolyte Using Lithographic Process
Tian, X., Zhao, T., Li, J., Li, T., Yuan, L., Xue, X., Wang, Z., & Zhang, J. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices · doi:10.1109/ted.2022.3154668 · Cited by 14
Assessing Identifiability in Airport Delay Propagation Roles Through Deep Learning Classification
Ivanoska, I., Pastorino, L., & Zanin, M. (2022) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3158313 · Cited by 14
“While this is not one of the main focuses of deep learning, several models have been developed, usually evolutions of models designed for image classification - see [39] for a full review.”
BackgroundKDCTime: Knowledge distillation with calibration on InceptionTime for time-series classification
Gong, X., Si, Y., Tian, Y., Lin, C., Zhang, X., & Liu, X. (2022) · Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2022.08.057 · Cited by 14
Solano‐Correa, Y. T., Meshkini, K., Bovolo, F., & Bruzzone, L. (2022) · IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1109/jstars.2022.3164547 · Cited by 14
Bushnaq, T., Algheshairy, R. M., Almujaydil, M. S., Malki, A. A., Alharbi, H. F., & Barakat, H. (2022) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph19137659 · Cited by 16
Zhou, Y., Xu, K., He, F., & Zhang, Z. (2022) · Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers · doi:10.1016/j.jtice.2022.104445 · Cited by 14
Temporal patterns selection for All-Cause Mortality prediction in T2D with ANNs
Novitski, P., Cohen, C. M., Karasik, A., Hodik, G., & Moskovitch, R. (2022) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2022.104198 · Cited by 15
Chaotic Time Series Recognition: A Deep Learning Model Inspired by Complex Systems Characteristics
Pourafzal, A., Fereidunian, A., & Safarihamid, K. (2022) · International Journal of Engineering · doi:10.5829/ije.2023.36.01a.01 · Cited by 14
Viana, J., Farkhari, H., Campos, L. M., Sebastião, P., Koutlia, K., Lagén, S., Bernardo, L., & Dinis, R. (2022) · IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference · doi:10.1109/vtc2022-fall57202.2022.10012726 · Cited by 14
Peláez-Rodríguez, C., Marina, C. M., Pérez‐Aracil, J., Casanova-Mateo, C., & Salcedo‐Sanz, S. (2023) · Atmosphere · doi:10.3390/atmos14030542 · Cited by 15
“In recent decades, deep learning approaches have become increasingly popular for performing tasks related to time series classification or regression [63,64].”
BackgroundMethodIoT-assisted feature learning for surface settlement prediction caused by shield tunnelling
Wen, Z., Guo, L., Meng, S., Rong, X., & Shi, Y. (2023) · Computer Communications · doi:10.1016/j.comcom.2023.03.007 · Cited by 15
Shi, C., Cheng, Y., Zhang, C., Yuan, J., Wang, Y., Jiang, X., & Zhu, C. (2023) · Agriculture · doi:10.3390/agriculture13030730 · Cited by 15
“Relevant research [26–28] also shows that deep learning exhibits good performance in processing time series classifications.”
BackgroundPrediction of Well Production Event Using Machine Learning Algorithms
Alatrach, Y., Mata, C., Omrani, P. S., Saputelli, L. A., Narayanan, R. K., & Hamdan, M. (2020) · Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference (ADIPEC) · doi:10.2118/202961-ms · Cited by 14
DriverRep: Driver identification through driving behavior embeddings
Azadani, M. N., & Boukerche, A. (2022) · Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing · doi:10.1016/j.jpdc.2022.01.010 · Cited by 14
timeXplain -- A Framework for Explaining the Predictions of Time Series ClassifiersPreprint
Mujkanovic, F., Doskoč, V., Schirneck, M., Schäfer, P., & Friedrich, T. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2007.07606 · Cited by 23
Wastensteiner, J., Nora Tobias, M., Haag, F., & Hopf, K. (2021) · doi:10.20378/irb-49912 · Cited by 17
“…detect household characteristics from electricity consumption smart meter data with good performance (Hopf, 2019; Wang et al., 2018), Third, the InceptionTime classifier (Ismail Fawaz et al., 2020, 2019), which combines an ensemble of five CNNs in that it parallelizes the convolutional layers.”
BackgroundUsing Artificial Intelligence To Reduce Food WastePreprint
Nu, Y., Belavina, E., & Girotra, K. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4826777 · Cited by 18
Kalach, F. E., Farahani, M. A., Wuest, T., & Harik, R. (2025) · Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing · doi:10.1016/j.rcim.2025.103011 · Cited by 13
Zou, Y., Pei, J., Liu, Y., Tan, S., Fang, H., Zheng, X., & Wang, T. (2025) · IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2025.3643447 · Cited by 13
“…the SCV using the network is divided into four steps as follows. a) 1D-CNN Feature Extraction: The simulated spectral curve is treated as a wave signal, allowing a 1D-CNN to be directly applied to the raw data, extracting information analogous to that obtained in time series analysis [40].”
Light Weight Dilated CNN for Time Series Classification and Prediction
Khanna, P., & Narayan, A. (2020) · Conference proceedings/Conference proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/smc42975.2020.9283052 · Cited by 13
“A comprehensive survey on deep learning techniques for time series forecasting is presented in [19], and a robust benchmarking of algorithms is presented in [20].”
BackgroundYong, B. X., & Brintrup, A. M. (2022) · Applied Soft Computing · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2022.108912 · Cited by 14
Multichannel convolution neural network for gas mixture classification
Oh, Y., Lim, C., Lee, J., Kim, S., & Kim, S. (2022) · Annals of Operations Research · doi:10.1007/s10479-022-04715-2 · Cited by 14
“AccordingtoFawazetal.”
Early Time Series Classification Using TCN-Transformer
Chen, H., Tian, A., Zhang, Y., & Liu, Y. (2022) · IEEE International Conference on Civil Aviation Safety and Information Technology (ICCASIT) · doi:10.1109/iccasit55263.2022.9986835 · Cited by 13
A Weighted Deep Ensemble for Indian Sign Language Recognition
Gupta, R., Bhatnagar, A. S., & Singh, G. (2023) · IETE Journal of Research · doi:10.1080/03772063.2023.2175057 · Cited by 13
Ab.Khalil, M. R., & Bakar, A. A. (2023) · Sains Malaysiana · doi:10.17576/jsm-2023-5203-22 · Cited by 13
Additive autoencoder for dimension estimation
Kärkkäinen, T., & Hänninen, J. (2023) · Neurocomputing · doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2023.126520 · Cited by 19
TSC-AutoML: Meta-learning for Automatic Time Series Classification Algorithm Selection
Mu, T., Wang, H., Zheng, S., Liang, Z., Wang, C., Shao, X., & Liang, Z. (2023) · IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE) · doi:10.1109/icde55515.2023.00084 · Cited by 13
“Fawaz [23] et al. compared the performance of nine current mainstream deep learning frameworks on temporal data classification tasks through extensive experiments, among which, the performance of the residual network (ResNet) significantly outperformed the other structures.”
BackgroundCheng, C., Chen, P.-W., Hsieh, Y.-C., & Wu, Y.-T. (2023) · Mathematics · doi:10.3390/math11153291 · Cited by 13
Carloni, G., Berti, A., Iacconi, C., Pascali, M. A., & Colantonio, S. (2023) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-37660-3_38 · Cited by 13
Sencaki, D. B., Putri, M. N., Santosa, B. H., Arfah, S., Arifandri, R., Afifuddin, A., Habibie, M. I., Putra, P. K., Anatoly, N., Permata, Z. D. O., et al. (2023) · Remote Sensing Applications Society and Environment · doi:10.1016/j.rsase.2023.101040 · Cited by 13
Application of deep learning techniques for nuclear power plant transient identification
Ramezani, I., Vosoughi, N., & Ghofrani, M. B. (2023) · Annals of Nuclear Energy · doi:10.1016/j.anucene.2023.110113 · Cited by 15
Robot Motion Prediction by Channel State Information
Zandi, R., Salehinejad, H., Behzad, K., Motamedi, E., & Siami, M. (2023) · Machine learning for signal processing ... · doi:10.1109/mlsp55844.2023.10285960 · Cited by 13
Portaz, M., Corbí, A., Casas-Ortiz, A., & Santos, O. C. (2024) · User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction · doi:10.1007/s11257-024-09393-2 · Cited by 14
Abbasi, M., & Saeedi, P. (2024) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3397783 · Cited by 13
“Specifically, we compared Inception Time (IT) and its augmented variants (IT + TPS, IT + GTA) with the most accurate and well-known traditional classifiers (CIF, ROCKET TDE, HIVE-COTE (HC1), HIVE-COTE 2.0 (HC2)), and DTW-D [75], as the baseline for multivariate time series classification.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialProbabilistic grammars for modeling dynamical systems from coarse, noisy, and partial data
Omejc, N., Gec, B., Brence, J., Todorovski, L., & Džeroski, S. (2024) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/s10994-024-06522-1 · Cited by 13
“Statistical results were corrected for multiple comparisons using Holm’s method (Fawaz et al., 2019).”
Pięta, P., Jegierski, H., Babiuch, P., Jegierski, M., Płaza, M., Łukawski, G., Deniziak, S. R., Jasiński, A., Opałka, J., Wȩgrzyn, P., et al. (2024) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3424930 · Cited by 15
“In this case, each experiment trained 4 models (transformer, LSTM, and two one-dimensional CNNs [112] of different architectures, identified as CNN1 and CNN2 and described in Table 2), resulting in 60 models in total.”
MethodGui, H., Li, G., Tang, X., & Lu, J. (2024) · Knowledge-Based Systems · doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2024.112210 · Cited by 15
Chen, S., Sun, W., Huang, L., Li, X. P., Wang, Q., & John, D. (2024) · Knowledge-Based Systems · doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2024.112253 · Cited by 14
Early identification of immature rubber plantations using Landsat and Sentinel satellite images
Wang, X., Chen, B., Dong, J., Gao, Y., Wang, G., Lai, H., Wu, Z., Yang, C., Kou, W., & Yun, T. (2024) · International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation · doi:10.1016/j.jag.2024.104097 · Cited by 13
Seifer, A.-K., Küderle, A., Dorschky, E., Moradi, H., Hannemann, R., & Eskofier, B. M. (2024) · IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2024.3454824 · Cited by 13
Non-Invasive Diagnostic Approaches for Kidney Disease: The Role of Electronic Nose Systems
Sansone, F., & Tonacci, A. (2024) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s24196475 · Cited by 14
“…most widely used models include Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), employed for VOC assessment [43], food-related studies [44], environmental monitoring [45], and security tasks [46]; Extreme Learning Machines (ELMs), finding use in VOC assessment [47] and environmental use cases [48]; Convolutional…”
MethodWhich uncertainty measure better predicts gold prices? New evidence from a CNN-LSTM approach
You, W.-H., Chen, J., Xie, H., & Ren, Y. (2025) · The North American journal of economics and finance · doi:10.1016/j.najef.2025.102375 · Cited by 15
Brausch, L., Hewener, H., & Lukowicz, P. (2019) · International Symposium on Wearable Computers · doi:10.1145/3341163.3347749 · Cited by 13
“The ML methods include custom versions of a multilayer perceptron (MLP) [3, 11], a fully convolutional network (FCN) [11], a 1-D convolutional”
BackgroundMethodOregi, I., Ser, J. D., Pérez, A., & Lozano, J. A. (2020) · Neural Networks · doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2020.04.030 · Cited by 13
Blancato, K., Ness, M., Huber, D., Lu, Y., & Angus, R. (2022) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7563 · Cited by 13
Wang, C., Sun, H., Zhao, R., & Cao, X. (2020) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s20247031 · Cited by 14
Anomaly Detection of Periodic Multivariate Time Series under High Acquisition Frequency Scene in IoT
Zhang, S., Chen, X., Chen, J., Jiang, Q., & Huang, H. (2020) · IEEE ... International Conference on Data Mining workshops · doi:10.1109/icdmw51313.2020.00078 · Cited by 13
“They can mainly be divided into seven different categories: Image, Sensor, Motion, Spectrographs, ECG, Electric Devices and Simulated Data [35].”
BackgroundFrizzarin, M., Bevilacqua, A., Dhariyal, B., Domijan, K., Ferraccioli, F., Hayes, E., Ifrim, G., Konkolewska, A., Nguyen, T. L., Mbaka, U., et al. (2021) · Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems · doi:10.1016/j.chemolab.2021.104442 · Cited by 15
Vizitiu, A., Niță, C.-I., Toev, R. M., Suditu, T., Suciu, C., & Lucian Mihai, I. T. U. (2021) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app11199049 · Cited by 13
“First, we only experimented with 1D-CNN for the deep learning-based approach, while sequence dataoriented architectures such as RNNs and Temporal Convolutional Networks (TCNs) have been used in the past [35,36].”
MethodModel-assisted deep learning of rare extreme events from partial observations
Asch, A., Brady, E. J., Gallardo, H., Hood, J., Chu, B., & Farazmand, M. (2022) · Chaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science · doi:10.1063/5.0077646 · Cited by 15
Benefit-aware early prediction of health outcomes on multivariate EEG time series
Shekhar, S., Eswaran, D., Hooi, B., Elmer, J., Faloutsos, C., & Akoglu, L. (2023) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2023.104296 · Cited by 16
A Survey of Rainfall Prediction Using Deep Learning
Hussain, J., & Zoremsanga, C. (2021) · International Conference on Electrical, Control and Instrumentation Engineering (ICECIE) · doi:10.1109/icecie52348.2021.9664730 · Cited by 14
Multi-stage deep probabilistic prediction for travel demand
Alghamdi, D., Basulaiman, K., & Rajgopal, J. (2022) · Applied Intelligence · doi:10.1007/s10489-021-03047-1 · Cited by 13
“The general approach to applying CNN over a time stamp t with a filter F of length l was described by [57] as follows:”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialIntelligent Guidance and Control Methods for Missile Swarm
Huang, H., Zhao, X. M., & Zhang, X. Y. (2022) · Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience · doi:10.1155/2022/8235148 · Cited by 13
“Autonomous attack is an operation mode in which UAV independently completes target data processing and fusion, situation assessment, weapon target allocation, flight control, weapon launch, attack target, and operational effectiveness evaluation in the operational airspace [14, 15].”
BackgroundBrausch, L., Hewener, H., & Lukowicz, P. (2022) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s22072789 · Cited by 13
Community detection in subspace of attribute
Chen, H., Yu, Z., Yang, Q.-L., & Shao, J.-M. (2022) · Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2022.04.047 · Cited by 10
LockedDown: Exploiting Contention on Host-GPU PCIe Bus for Fun and Profit
Side, M., Yao, F., & Zhang, Z. (2022) · IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy · doi:10.1109/eurosp53844.2022.00025 · Cited by 14
“The hyperparameters and parameters of this model can be found in [10], [21].”
BackgroundIdentifying bird species by their calls in Soundscapes
Maclean, K., & Triguero, I. (2023) · Applied Intelligence · doi:10.1007/s10489-023-04486-8 · Cited by 13
“Time Series Forecasting is very popular, but recently, Time Series Classification (TSC) has increased in popularity significantly [15, 18] in various real-world applications ranging from human activity recognition [14] to medical diagnosis [19].”
BackgroundShi, Y., & Zhang, L. (2023) · Reliability Engineering & System Safety · doi:10.1016/j.ress.2023.109306 · Cited by 13
A New Method of Time-Series Event Prediction Based on Sequence Labeling
Zhong, Z., Lv, S., & Shi, K. (2023) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app13095329 · Cited by 13
A Deep Learning Approach for Fusing Sensor Data from Screw Compressors
Alonso, S., Pérez, D., Morán, A., Fuertes, J. J., Díaz, I., & Domínguez, M. (2019) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s19132868 · Cited by 12
“The methods reviewed in [17] were tested, and here, results from the most relevant ones are presented, including multilayer perceptron (MLP), multichannel deep convolutional neural network (MCDCNN), and time Le-Net.”
BackgroundMethodIntegrating Writing Dynamics in CNN for Online Children Handwriting Recognition
Corbillé, S., Fromont, É., Anquetil, É., & Nerdeux, P. (2020) · International Conference on Frontiers in Handwriting Recognition · doi:10.1109/icfhr2020.2020.00057 · Cited by 16
“We would like to explore the use of CNN directly on the time series signal as done for example in [25].”
MethodA Systematic Approach for Evaluating Artificial Intelligence Models in Industrial Settings
Benedick, P.-L., Robert, J., & Le Traon, Y. (2021) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s21186195 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Ismail Fawaz, H., Forestier, G., Weber, J., Idoumghar, L., & Muller, P.-A.
- Affiliations
- Université de Haute-Alsace (FR)
- Venue
- Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery
- Published
- 2019-03-02
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 917-963
- ISSN
- 1384-5810 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-756X
- OpenAlex
- W2892035503
- Cited by
- 3,342
- References
- 149
- Citations by year
- 2026: 385 · 2025: 493 · 2024: 507 · 2023: 517 · 2022: 527 · 2021: 494 · 2020: 328 · 2019: 85
- FWCI
- 227.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- HAL Portal Artxiker (Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (India)) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-17-CE23-0015)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Time Series Analysis and Forecasting
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Music and Audio Processing
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
- Keywords
- time series classification, deep neural network, deep learning architectures, convolutional neural networks, ResNet, multivariate time series, univariate time series
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review