Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · October 21, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Time series foundation models (TSFMs) perform unevenly across forecasting tasks. Recent work uses agentic model orchestration (AMO) to select or combine TSFMs, often outperforming individual forecasters. Yet these gains may reflect stronger or more complementary candidates rather than better orchestration. To disentangle these effects, we introduce FairAMO, a controlled evaluation protocol with frozen candidate forecasts. Experiments on GIFT-Eval show that AMO improves accuracy, but its gains are bounded by the candidate TSFMs. The best orchestrators reduce MASE by less than 6% relative to the best single TSFM across all tasks. These gains depend on complementarity (different candidates excel on different tasks) rather than the number of candidates. Adding members yields diminishing returns, and a redundant member can erase these gains. The value of historical evidence also saturates quickly. A few recent windows capture all gains, and further history adds none. These findings separate system-level forecasting gains from the contribution of orchestration itself.