跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2605.10822 · v2

Benchmarking Sensor-Fault Robustness in Forecasting

首次提交 2026-05-12 00:41
版本更新 2026-11-04 04:34
雷达观测 2026-11-05 11:11
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Cyber-physical system (CPS) forecasting models depend on sensor streams with noisy, biased, missing, or temporally misaligned readings, yet standard forecasting evaluation often selects models by nominal error without showing whether they remain robust under such faults. We introduce SensorFault-Bench, a CPS-grounded protocol that evaluates forecasting architectures and robustness-improvement methods through controlled synthetic stress tests of isolated input faults, together with an operational taxonomy of the methods. Across four real-world datasets and eight scored scenarios governed by a standardized severity model, it reports worst-scenario degradation, clean mean squared error (MSE), and worst-scenario fault-time MSE, separating relative robustness from absolute error. Explicit fault-training methods train on adjacent fault families disjoint from the scored scenarios. Empirically, forecasting architectures favored by clean MSE can degrade sharply under faults, and clean-MSE rankings can disagree with worst-scenario fault-time error rankings. Chronos-2, the evaluated zero-shot foundation model, matches or trails the last-value naive forecaster in clean MSE on the two single-target datasets and has the largest worst-scenario degradation on ETTh1 and Traffic, where all channels are forecast targets. For the evaluated robustness-improvement method set, paired deltas show selective degradation reductions: projected gradient descent adversarial training and randomized training lead where value faults dominate observed degradation, and fault augmentation leads on Traffic, where availability faults dominate. High degradation reveals fault sensitivity that clean MSE misses, while low degradation supports robustness only within the evaluated scenarios. The benchmark therefore screens forecasters before use in a specific deployment, which requires validation against its recorded faults.

作者备注:Accepted at NeurIPS 2026, Evaluations & Datasets Track. 67 pages, 6 figures, 38 tables. Code: https://github.com/awindmann/SensorFault-Bench

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v2 · 2026-11-04 04:34 · 最新观测版本

Benchmarking Sensor-Fault Robustness in Forecasting

Cyber-physical system (CPS) forecasting models depend on sensor streams with noisy, biased, missing, or temporally misaligned readings, yet standard forecasting evaluation often selects models by nominal error without showing whether they remain robust under such faults. We introduce SensorFault-Bench, a CPS-grounded protocol that evaluates forecasting architectures and robustness-improvement methods through controlled synthetic stress tests of isolated input faults, together with an operational taxonomy of the methods. Across four real-world datasets and eight scored scenarios governed by a standardized severity model, it reports worst-scenario degradation, clean mean squared error (MSE), and worst-scenario fault-time MSE, separating relative robustness from absolute error. Explicit fault-training methods train on adjacent fault families disjoint from the scored scenarios. Empirically, forecasting architectures favored by clean MSE can degrade sharply under faults, and clean-MSE rankings can disagree with worst-scenario fault-time error rankings. Chronos-2, the evaluated zero-shot foundation model, matches or trails the last-value naive forecaster in clean MSE on the two single-target datasets and has the largest worst-scenario degradation on ETTh1 and Traffic, where all channels are forecast targets. For the evaluated robustness-improvement method set, paired deltas show selective degradation reductions: projected gradient descent adversarial training and randomized training lead where value faults dominate observed degradation, and fault augmentation leads on Traffic, where availability faults dominate. High degradation reveals fault sensitivity that clean MSE misses, while low degradation supports robustness only within the evaluated scenarios. The benchmark therefore screens forecasters before use in a specific deployment, which requires validation against its recorded faults.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗