Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40989451›Full record

ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2025

Deep learning in time series forecasting with transformer models and RNNs.

Rogerio Pereira Dos Santos, João P Matos-Carvalho, Valderi R Q Leithardt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Rogerio Pereira Dos SantosCOPELABS, Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Technologias, Lisboa, Portugal.
João P Matos-CarvalhoCOPELABS, Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Technologias, Lisboa, Portugal.
Valderi R Q LeithardtCOPELABS, Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Technologias, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-0446-9271

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the increasing need for accurate weather forecasts, the use of neural networks, especially transformer and recurrent neural networks (RNNs), has been highlighted for their ability to capture complex patterns in time series. This study examined 14 neural network models applied to forecast weather variables, evaluated using metrics such as median absolute error (MedianAbsE), mean absolute error (MeanAbsE), maximum absolute error (MaxAbsE), root mean squared percent error (RMSPE), and root mean square error (RMSE). Transformer-based models such as Informer, iTransformer, Former, and patch time series transformer (PatchTST) stood out for their accuracy in capturing long-term patterns, with Informer showing the best performance. In contrast, RNN models such as auto-temporal convolutional networks (TCN) and bidirectional TCN (BiTCN) were better suited to short-term forecasting, despite being more prone to significant errors. Using iTransformer it was possible to achieve a MedianAbsE of 1.21, MeanAbsE of 1.24, MaxAbsE of 2.86, RMSPE de 0.66, and RMSE de 1.43. This study demonstrates the potential of neural networks, especially transformers, to improve accuracy, providing a practical and theoretical basis for selecting the most suitable models for predictive applications.

Indexed as

Accuracy in forecastingDeep learningNeural networksPredictive applicationsRecurrent neural networks (RNNs)Transformer models

Identifiers

PMID40989451
PMCPMC12453695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.