An Empirical Evaluation of Factors Affecting SHAP Explanation of Time Series Classification

Explainable AI (XAI) has become an increasingly important topic for understanding and attributing the predictions made by complex Time Series Classification (TSC) models. Among attribution methods, SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) is widely regarded as an excellent attribution method; but its computational complexity, which scales exponentially with the number of features, limits its practicality for long time series. To address this, recent studies have shown that aggregating features via segmentation, to compute a single attribution value for a group of consecutive time points, drastically reduces SHAP running time. However, the choice of the optimal segmentation strategy remains an open question. In this work, we investigated eight different Time Series Segmentation algorithms to understand how segment compositions affect the explanation quality. We evaluate these approaches using two established XAI evaluation methodologies: InterpretTime and AUC Difference. Through experiments on both Multivariate (MTS) and Univariate Time Series (UTS), we find that the number of segments has a greater impact on explanation quality than the specific segmentation method. Notably, equal-length segmentation consistently outperforms most of the custom time series segmentation algorithms. Furthermore, we introduce a novel attribution normalisation technique that weights segments by their length and we show that it consistently improves attribution quality.

Stratify: Unifying Multi-Step Forecasting Strategies

A key aspect of temporal domains is the ability to make predictions multiple time steps into the future, a process known as multi-step forecasting (MSF). At the core of this process is selecting a forecasting strategy, however, with no existing frameworks to map out the space of strategies, practitioners are left with ad-hoc methods for strategy selection. In this work, we propose Stratify, a parameterised framework that addresses multi-step forecasting, unifying existing strategies and introducing novel, improved strategies. We evaluate Stratify on 18 benchmark datasets, five function classes, and short to long forecast horizons (10, 20, 40, 80). In over 84% of 1080 experiments, novel strategies in Stratify improved performance compared to all existing ones. Importantly, we find that no single strategy consistently outperforms others in all task settings, highlighting the need for practitioners explore the Stratify space to carefully search and select forecasting strategies based on task-specific requirements. Our results are the most comprehensive benchmarking of known and novel forecasting strategies. We make code available to reproduce our results.

Time-Series Classification for Dynamic Strategies in Multi-Step Forecasting

Multi-step forecasting (MSF) in time-series, the ability to make predictions multiple time steps into the future, is fundamental to almost all temporal domains. To make such forecasts, one must assume the recursive complexity of the temporal dynamics. Such assumptions are referred to as the forecasting strategy used to train a predictive model. Previous work shows that it is not clear which forecasting strategy is optimal a priori to evaluating on unseen data. Furthermore, current approaches to MSF use a single (fixed) forecasting strategy. In this paper, we characterise the instance-level variance of optimal forecasting strategies and propose Dynamic Strategies (DyStrat) for MSF. We experiment using 10 datasets from different scales, domains, and lengths of multi-step horizons. When using a random-forest-based classifier, DyStrat outperforms the best fixed strategy, which is not knowable a priori, 94% of the time, with an average reduction in mean-squared error of 11%. Our approach typically triples the top-1 accuracy compared to current approaches. Notably, we show DyStrat generalises well for any MSF task.