| Literature DB >> 34616897 |
Tianming Yu1, Qunfeng Gan2, Guoliang Feng1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The real time series is affected by various combinations of influences, consequently, it has a variety of variation modality. It is hard to reflect the variation characteristic of the time series accurately when simulating time series only by a single model. Most of the existing methods focused on numerical prediction of time series. Also, the forecast uncertainty of time series is resolved by the interval prediction. However, few researches focus on making the model interpretable and easily comprehended by humans.Entities:
Keywords: Fuzzy cognitive maps; Granular computing; Time series
Year: 2021 PMID: 34616897 PMCID: PMC8459780 DOI: 10.7717/peerj-cs.726
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ Comput Sci ISSN: 2376-5992
Figure 1An example of FCMs consisting of three nodes.
Figure 2Modeling framework.
Figure 3Experimental datasets.
Model parameter setting.
| Number | Parameters | Values |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | λ | 5 |
| 2 | Submodel number | 100 |
| 3 | Node number | 3 |
| 4 | Subsequence length | 5 |
| 5 | Granularity level | 1 |
The semantics of FCMs nodes.
| Data | Low | Medium | High |
|---|---|---|---|
| MG | 0.2192 | 0.7665 | 1.3137 |
| Exchange rate | 0.5980 | 1.0430 | 1.4880 |
| Vatnsdalsa | 3.6700 | 28.8350 | 54.0000 |
| Wind speed | 0.0900 | 9.9400 | 19.7900 |
Figure 4The prediction results of MG time series.
Figure 7The prediction results of wind speed.
Figure 6The prediction results of Vatnsdalsa time series.
Experimental results.
| DataSet | Weight method | PICP | PINAW | CWC | RMSE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MG | dynamic weight | 0.9125 | 0.1472 | 0.2011 | 0.0265 |
| model weight | 0.9208 | 0.2925 | 0.3998 | 0.1169 | |
| average weight | 0.9500 | 0.3571 | 0.4883 | 0.1074 | |
| Exchange rate | dynamic weight | 0.8730 | 0.0959 | 0.1309 | 0.0168 |
| model weight | 1.0000 | 0.6622 | 0.9058 | 0.1762 | |
| average weight | 1.0000 | 0.6736 | 0.9214 | 0.2031 | |
| Vatnsdalsa | dynamic weight | 0.8676 | 0.0685 | 0.0934 | 0.7600 |
| model weight | 0.9041 | 0.1355 | 0.1852 | 1.5496 | |
| average weight | 0.9087 | 0.1480 | 0.2022 | 1.7385 | |
| Wind speed | dynamic weight | 0.8701 | 0.1281 | 0.1748 | 0.7626 |
| model weight | 0.9761 | 0.3141 | 0.4297 | 1.2611 | |
| average weight | 0.9763 | 0.3392 | 0.4639 | 1.5287 |
Figure 8Plots of RMSE vs varying number of nodes with overall data.
(A) MG, (B) exchange rate, (C) vatnsdalsa, (D) wind speed.
Comparison of prediction RMSE between multimodal model and other models.
| Data | Muti-modal | Overall model | LSTM | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RMSE | Node number | |||
| MG | 0.0265 | 0.0424 | 8 | 0.0348 |
| Exchange rate | 0.0168 | 0.0344 | 7 | 0.0225 |
| Vatnsdalsa | 0.7600 | 2.4006 | 5 | 1.2041 |
| Wind speed | 0.7626 | 0.8028 | 10 | 0.8416 |
The execution time of algorithms (s).
| Data | Proposed | Single model | LSTM |
|---|---|---|---|
| MG | 51.95 | 1.47 | 179.41 |
| Exchange rate | 46.04 | 1.16 | 57.44 |
| Vatnsdalsa | 51.26 | 0.92 | 157.23 |
| Wind speed | 335.05 | 4.06 | 4,137.44 |