Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · November 5, 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.
We consider the problem of cross-validation (CV) in time series forecasting, with a focus on global forecasting models based on deep learning. The prevailing CV strategy in forecasting is to partition data across time with the last part of each series used for testing. With global models trained on collections of time series, however, a fundamentally different approach becomes possible: partitioning across series and time. We formalize series-wise CV for global forecasting models and benchmark several instantiations, including K-fold CV, bootstrapping, and Monte Carlo CV, on 11 datasets with 10 neural network architectures. We evaluate CV procedures along five dimensions: performance estimation, overoptimism rate, model selection accuracy, regret, and downstream forecasting performance. We withhold a random fraction of series from training so that they appear only in the test set. This protocol simulates the emergence of new series not seen during training, a common scenario in global forecasting. Under this protocol, our results reveal a nuanced trade-off: series-wise CV yields better downstream forecasting accuracy by guiding model selection toward configurations that generalize across both time and series, while time-wise CV retains a slight advantage for estimating out-of-sample error.