Timestral: Mistral's time-series foundation models
Posted by groar 3 days ago
Comments
Comment by joefourier 3 days ago
> Known-future covariates. Some drivers of sensor behaviour are known in advance, such as production schedules, planned shutdowns, weather forecasts. Timestral can condition on them to improve forecast quality, so a scheduled load increase is expected rather than flagged as a surprise.
To me this should be the entire basis of the system, not a condition to improve forecast quality? Like if you're modelling electricity consumption, if all you have is a window of N previous samples, you're going to get completely beaten by a comparatively simple system that knows the time of day, that there's holidays coming up, the weather forecast, etc.
I would also think that these time-series forecasting models would gain from a sophisticated understanding at least the labels of the covariates? A 5M model has no idea what a "bank holiday" is, it just sees an arbitrary class go from 0 to 1, and won't have any useful inductive biases as to what it means or how to link them to other pieces of information.
E.g., wouldn't you predict €/MWh of electricity far more accurately with access to price of natural gas (itself influenced by many geopolitical factors), breakdown in composition of production of each energy source, predictions about roll-out (requiring a sophisticated LLM capable of understanding news and their implications), etc. What's the use in trying to predict it from 2 variables and a narrow window looking back at just 8192 or 32768 samples?
Or perhaps I misunderstand the use-case and this is more for extremely short term movements?
Comment by justincormack 3 days ago
Comment by jldugger 2 days ago
Problem is you really don't even need ML for the curve fitting tools. Just ARIMA or Holt Winters is enough and likely faster. Heck, Kubernetes HPA doesn't even implement full PID, just P.
It seems like the main challenge is going to be finding domains where accuracy is important enough to spend inference token money on, but not so important that you'd hire a team to build a custom model. Or maybe that team borrows Timestral weights to fine tune to the domain, but they probably already have a different model customized to the problem?
Comment by CactusOnFire 18 hours ago
Comment by jldugger 16 hours ago
Comment by sc077y 2 days ago
Comment by btchashpoint 2 days ago
Comment by Y_Y 3 days ago
You're right but, if the time series looks like music then you can apply your music domain knowledge. You don't have to only apply knowledge that's general across every domain, part of the magic of large neural nets is that you can do recognition and prediction at the same time thereby using (statistically) things known from training about how to identify a sequence and then also how to continue it.
Sure adding outside info helps even more, but with enough data it should become unnecessary (or so goes the theory).
Comment by joefourier 3 days ago
Is there a reason you don't throw in something like cross-attention on an embedding of the sequence description/data labels? I've trained numerous generative models for audio and images and it's always the case that the unconditional model performs worse, trains slower, etc. than the conditional one (with the best performance from a hybrid using classifier-free guidance or similar scheme).
Again I don't have experience with the domain of time-series forecasting directly, but I would think there are generalities between autoregressive generative models and time-series forecasting, given that both involve predicting the next sample(s) given N regularly sampled past inputs.
Comment by ekabod 2 days ago
Won't you need to attribute a weight to the data coming from the model and the weight for your data?
Comment by jc4p 2 days ago
Would love to know actual time series foundation model use cases!
Comment by mr_toad 2 days ago
Comment by stanfordkid 2 days ago
Comment by vintermann 3 days ago
That seems like a scenario where there wouldn't be external sources of information capable of improving your predictions. It also seemed to me like a scenario where good old fashioned statistical methods would outperform LSTMs, which was what they used.
(I didn't get the job - I was offered it, but they rescinded their offer at the last moment, supposedly because their investors had insisted they should hire a web developer instead.)
Comment by tdb7893 2 days ago
I'm sure someone who actually knows this stuff has a better easy to view it but my impression was that these time series foundation models aren't trained for a specific dataset but more they are trained on a procedure for how to look at datasets and make predictions. It doesn't seem to lump things into a bucket much more than any other model type (which also are just consistent procedures to look at datasets). It's not like you have radically different model types across different fields.
Comment by sheepscreek 2 days ago
To improve the robustness of machine learning models, artificial noise is often introduced into actual training data. Something like Timestral could simplify the process of generating it.
Comment by autuni 2 days ago
That being said, more information is of course better, assuming it doesn't introduce bias, like focusing on specific events like holidays too much, when the information is already contained in the historical data, without having to make assumptions about what an upcoming holiday means.
The biggest challenge last time I worked with time series forecasting (which is ~5 years ago) was learning long-term shifts in the baseline of the data (e.g., the general use of electricity always goes up, a lot more solar panels and EVs influence the baseline, etc.).
I can only assume (hope) that there has been some substantial progress in that area though.
(Edited the formatting for a nicer reading experience)
Comment by jonesn11 1 day ago
Comment by cwmoore 2 days ago
Comment by jorritposthuma 2 days ago
Comment by antonioevans 3 days ago
Comment by logancbrown 3 days ago
Sure, you could train a XGboost model on a time series with holiday or event covariates, but what if you have 10k different series to forecast for? You could train 10k different models, one for each series, but then they have very little history to learn from. Alternatively, you could train a single generic model to cover all 10k, but then you have to deal with scale mismatch between series in addition to the feature dev overhead between series. A TSFM saves a ton of work in modeling each of these series and could potentially generalize better to produce more accurate forecasts.
Comment by niltecedu 2 days ago
Comment by logancbrown 2 days ago
Comment by niltecedu 1 hour ago
Comment by kianN 2 days ago
This is a pretty approachable overview: https://casrai.org/guides/bayesian-hierarchical-models
Andrew Gelman has several books covering this topic in great depth as well.
Comment by kpatucha 21 hours ago
I would be interested in such guide. Do you have alternatives?
Comment by articlepan 3 days ago
Comment by dominotw 2 days ago
who has these though? i cannot imagine somoone making sense of 10k timeseries.
Comment by logancbrown 2 days ago
Comment by dominotw 2 days ago
Comment by logancbrown 2 days ago
Comment by probablypower 2 days ago
Comment by speedgoose 2 days ago
Comment by logancbrown 2 days ago
Comment by niltecedu 2 days ago
Comment by magimas 2 days ago
We're running 150k models per day and while I'm sure I could scale this to running them every 30 minutes, it would mostly be me throwing money at the problem to parallelize the compute.
Comment by niltecedu 1 hour ago
It wasn't that expensive, the main problem was the storage bottleneck which got fixed with just some LVM cache and gen5 ssds.
Comment by Trusteando 2 days ago
Comment by edot 3 days ago
Speed looks nice too. I want an open weight model with this performance now.
Comment by OKRainbowKid 3 days ago
Comment by GeoffNN 3 days ago
Comment by dfdydx 3 days ago
Comment by GeoffNN 3 days ago
If you compare the 2, it's not a strict "timestral is better" story - the winrates are tight - your probably should try both on your use-case. We have a 42% winrate vs Timestral on fevbench for instance.
Ofc, our main value is not just these models, but also 1) extra capabilities (like our model that can natively account for stockouts/censored data, and others coming soon), 2) our systems and products around the model, and 3) we're all laser focused on time-series/forecasting
Comment by gturri 3 days ago
Comment by ritzaco 3 days ago
Comment by maelito 3 days ago
Edit : working with GLM5.3 now, it's also slow. Maybe Mistral's under heavy load.
Disclaimer : Not Cofounder of The Forecasting Company here
Comment by sspiff 3 days ago
Something is going on with the performance (as in speed of the service, not quality). Some days it's quite fast, some days it's so slow I interrupt it because I thought it was hanging.
I think they're shifting hosting capacity around, or otherwise messing with the model. Note that it's still a "preview" version, meaning they're still training it further for the final release and they are likely still figuring out the optimal hosting configuration as well.
It wouldn't surprise me to see further changes in both quality of the model and speed before the final release.
Comment by isidor_nikolic 2 days ago
<mistral vibe pm here>
Comment by sspiff 2 days ago
I'm looking forward to the weights release as well, has anything about the architecture and possibly quantization resilience been shared publicly so far?
Comment by pims 3 days ago
Comment by isidor_nikolic 2 days ago
<mistral vibe pm here>
Comment by pims 1 day ago
Comment by data-ottawa 2 days ago
Comment by maelito 2 days ago
Comment by nozzlegear 2 days ago
I agree with you though. It's slow as hell, and so is their GLM offering.
Comment by maelito 2 days ago
Comment by nozzlegear 2 days ago
Comment by maelito 2 days ago
Comment by pims 2 days ago
Comment by isidor_nikolic 2 days ago
Comment by pims 1 day ago
Comment by yaoke259 2 days ago
Comment by rubenfiszel 2 days ago
Comment by keyle 2 days ago
You are not authorized to exercise any rights under this license if the global consolidated monthly revenue of your company (or that of your employer) exceeds $20 million (or its equivalent in another currency) for the preceding month.Comment by whiplash451 2 days ago
Comment by keyle 2 days ago
They're French so they can't say "it was implied the US Dollar". This is so weird and broken I can't believe a legal team worked on this.
Comment by nelaggy 3 days ago
Comment by dudu24 3 days ago
Comment by GeoffNN 3 days ago
Comment by biosboiii 3 days ago
Seems unprofessional to me, you already started dunking on this release but added little to no arguments as to why or what is wrong here.
Comment by phoghed 3 days ago
Comment by GeoffNN 3 days ago
Comment by InsideOutSanta 2 days ago
Comment by GeoffNN 3 days ago
Comment by float4 3 days ago
Comment by nairboon 3 days ago
Comment by sambucini 2 days ago
Comment by beagle3 2 days ago
Comment by sambucini 2 days ago
Comment by kooi 2 days ago
Typically, in linear, non-linear, and NN models, we fit some noisy data to A) An underlying model with unknown parameters or B) A model free search which attempts to construct combination of "basis" functions or C) A purely black box model which we only care about Input/Output error.
A) is useful because often we know an underlying model we want to match, but don't know the parameter values. If we can determine the parameters, we get insights about the real system. E.g, how are these two variables coupled and how strongly -> We can make business decisions about what happens if we adjust some parameters.
So what exactly does this timeseries foundation model do and provide?
Maybe, the observability is that you have a forecast, and you adjust the covariates and see what happens. But one would want much more insights than a "executive summary" of the forecast.
The important parts for me as a signals processing R&D engineer.
> Classical models such as ARIMA and linear regression remain well-established tools for forecasting time series. These models are usually fitted to a single series and learn only from that series' history.
> Deep learning models such as PatchTST add the capacity to learn nonlinear patterns across many related series, but they are still typically trained from scratch on each dataset, so what they learn doesn't carry over to new domains.
> Time series foundation models bring the pre-training approach to time series. Trained on a large and diverse corpus, our model learns patterns that transfer across series, forecasting zero-shot on data it has never seen, even in domains where data is scarce.
Edit: Looks like it's a pure black box which you can run on premise.
> Output: Probabilistic forecasts, 21 quantiles
> Inputs: Multivariate targets, past-only and known-future covariates
Comment by traceroute66 2 days ago
"We have published a GitHub repository so you can run Timestral on your own data."
Comment by amai 3 days ago
Comment by colesantiago 3 days ago
No need to pay for proprietary TimeGPT.
Comment by pquerna 3 days ago
Calling it "Modified" MIT is just misleading.
Comment by limagnolia 1 day ago
Comment by kooi 2 days ago
Sounds like a great problem to have.
Comment by outworlder 2 days ago
Comment by rubyfan 2 days ago
Comment by alex7o 2 days ago
Comment by AndrewKemendo 2 days ago
Spacetimeformer was imo a huge leap forward that got overshadowed by all the language model progress
Excited to see more effort put into time series forecasting
Comment by bojackh 2 days ago
Comment by davedx 2 days ago
Comment by dingaling911 2 days ago
Comment by browningstreet 2 days ago
Comment by dominotw 2 days ago
lol. so what?
Comment by MisterMunchkin 2 days ago
Comment by ygouzerh 1 day ago
We keep struggling with disk capacity on servers being filled, which will then need cleaning. Currently, we got an alert when it's reaching 80%. It's reactive, we need to work on an unplanned task, and it disrupt our sprint and delivery commitments.
Instead, we could pipe the disk capacity data points to Timestral, and we could approximate the date when we will need to work on it, way earlier, so that we can plan our work accordingly.
I guess it might be integrated later directly in tools like Datadog, or Cloudflare straight away, rather than being used by corporates as it is.
Comment by vdfs 2 days ago
Comment by dcl 2 days ago
Comment by dcl 2 days ago
Comment by whatever1 2 days ago
Which is why at the end of the day why nobody trusts or blames the forecasting models, specially in all or nothing types of decisions.
Comment by rodonn 1 day ago
For example you can look at the calibration of the forecasts: Take all the outcomes where you estimated ~10% probability. How many of them actually happened? If you are an well-calibrated forecaster, the actual number should be fairly close to 10%.
Brier Score:
Comment by sh34r 2 days ago
Or the poll-bashing that happened after the 2016 election when an outcome with a 29% chance per one model was observed.
Any interesting forecasting problem is underconstrained. Monte Carlo methods are the classic way to mitigate that one-universe problem.
Nobody can predict the future with certainty. All models are wrong, but some are useful.
Comment by whatever1 2 days ago
I fully agree that all models are wrong.
Their main usage is just replaying the past or encoding the modelers assumptions for the future.
But there is no way to know if a model is good or bad.
There would be if we had infinite universes.
Comment by tom_mc 2 days ago
Comment by whatever1 2 days ago
1. No guarantee that the universe tomorrow will behave as the distributions you used in your Monte Carlo today.
2. If the universe stats serving you 10 unlikely events in a row, is your model model wrong, or just 10 unlucky draws? If your model was correct and you start "correcting it" based on these 10 draws, you now made it wrong.
Comment by tom_mc 2 days ago
Comment by beernet 3 days ago
Comment by AtHeartEngineer 3 days ago
Honestly this might be very good for feature selection to refine a much more specialized model.
Comment by saithound 3 days ago
Comment by GeoffNN 3 days ago
Comment by Matthewmodelfla 2 days ago
Comment by roger-2026 2 days ago
Comment by latencyharbor 2 days ago
Comment by dortesedixson 3 days ago
Comment by kalf78 3 days ago
Comment by burcsahinoglu 3 days ago
Comment by ottomengis 3 days ago
Comment by glimshe 3 days ago
With such strong human capital, both in quantity and quality, Europe should in theory be competitive with US and China in AI.
Comment by aniviacat 2 days ago
Comment by earthnail 3 days ago
Comment by glimshe 2 days ago
"Mistral is so bad, it's the only AI my school doesn't bother to block"
Comment by dadoum 2 days ago
Comment by Ey7NFZ3P0nzAe 2 days ago