When Does Self-Supervised Learning Transfer to Time-Series Tasks?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Self-supervised learning (SSL) assumes that solving pretext tasks on unlabeled data yields representations that transfer effectively across downstream applications via linear probing or fine-tuning. While this paradigm has driven major progress in vision and language, its benefits for time series remain under-investigated and often confounded by inconsistent experimental controls. To address this gap, we benchmark seven representative methods from five key SSL paradigms across anomaly detection, classification, and forecasting under parameter- and data-matched budgets. We find that transfer efficacy depends heavily on the downstream task. SSL yields substantial gains in anomaly detection and provides effective initializations for classification under fine-tuning, but offers limited to no advantage over non-pre-trained controls in forecasting. Furthermore, linear probing does not reliably predict fine-tuning performance, synthetic pre-training is often competitive with real-world corpora, and scaling encoder depth degrades forecasting accuracy. We synthesize these empirical results into practical evaluation and development guidelines for time-series SSL.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 May 2026.
Builds on
25 of 31 references.
References · 25
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 12,049
- 2021Emerging Properties in Self-Supervised Vision Transformerscited by 6,968
- 2020Informer: Beyond Efficient Transformer for Long Sequence Time-Series Forecastingcited by 2,169
- 2022A Time Series is Worth 64 Words: Long-term Forecasting with Transformerscited by 2,039
- 2021Autoformer: Decomposition Transformers with Auto-Correlation for Long-Term Series Forecastingcited by 1,676
- 2022Are Transformers Effective for Time Series Forecasting?cited by 1,424
- 2021VICReg: Variance-Invariance-Covariance Regularization for Self-Supervised Learningcited by 1,057
- 2023Self-Supervised Learning from Images with a Joint-Embedding Predictive Architecturecited by 1,039
- 2024Chronos: Learning the Language of Time Seriescited by 759
- 2023A decoder-only foundation model for time-series forecastingcited by 692
- 2021TS2Vec: Towards Universal Representation of Time Seriescited by 471
13 more
- 2018Detecting Spacecraft Anomalies Using LSTMs and Nonparametric Dynamic Thresholdingcited by 410
- 2018The UEA multivariate time series classification archive, 2018cited by 338
- 2021Monash Time Series Forecasting Archivecited by 267
- 2024Deep Time Series Models: A Comprehensive Survey and Benchmarkcited by 197
- 2020Current Time Series Anomaly Detection Benchmarks are Flawed and are Creating the Illusion of Progresscited by 151
- 2023Self-Supervised Learning for Time Series Analysis: Taxonomy, Progress, and Prospectscited by 99
- 2021Towards a Rigorous Evaluation of Time-series Anomaly Detectioncited by 97
- 2022Local Evaluation of Time Series Anomaly Detection Algorithmscited by 79
- 2023Soft Contrastive Learning for Time Seriescited by 51
- 2024Universal Time-Series Representation Learning: A Surveycited by 30
- 2025TimePFN: Effective Multivariate Time Series Forecasting with Synthetic Datacited by 29
- 2024TimeDART: A Diffusion Autoregressive Transformer for Self-Supervised Time Series Representationcited by 14
- 2024Self-Supervised Learning for Time Series: Contrastive or Generative?cited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.