Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · October 23, 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) offer strong zero-shot forecasting capabilities, but their high pretraining cost raises a practical sustainability question: does this upfront investment pay off over a full deployment lifecycle, compared to supervised standalone models that must be periodically retrained? We model the cumulative carbon cost of different approaches across a realistic industrial scenario: Chronos-2 amortizes its pretraining cost within months for large or frequently queried deployments, but a classical model remains cheaper indefinitely for small or rarely queried ones. For cases where reducing the TSFM's own cost matters, we show that removing a single encoder block (7.9% of parameters) via a gradient-free pruning criterion yields a consistent 6 to 9% reduction in FLOPs, CO2 emissions, and latency, at essentially no cost to zero-shot forecasting performance across a 25-task benchmark.