mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

An Empirical Audit of Input Encoders for Multi-Channel Signal Transformers

arXiv 2606.04752 ↗First posted 3 Jun 2026cs.LG cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Transformers consuming multi-channel scalar signals must embed C simultaneous values into one dmodel-dimensional vector per time step. We audit eight input encoders -- a shared-scalar baseline, per-channel linear projections, an orthogonality regulariser, a nonlinear MLP, block-partitioned concatenation, channel-independent and channel-as-token architectures, and a projected positional encoding -- on a synthetic benchmark where channel identity is informative and on ETTh1, scored by next-step negative log-likelihood. The headline is practical near-equivalence within a wide "top tier": the standard per-channel linear projection matches every alternative up to small, statistically real but practically modest differences. A direct geometric probe attributes this to a spontaneous orthogonalisation of the per-channel projections: with no explicit regulariser they tighten well beyond the near-orthogonality of random initialisation, letting the standard linear recover channel identity from the summed embedding. Two encoders lose decisively: the shared-scalar baseline collapses for information-theoretic reasons we make explicit, and the channel-independent PatchTST-spirit baseline overfits universally on the synthetic benchmark and underperforms on both. Paired tests resolve two small gaps: projecting the sinusoidal positional encoding through a learned linear layer edges the rest at small C by extending this orthogonality to the positional subspace; a nonlinear MLP stem edges them at the largest C, with the gap shrinking under more training data. The practical recommendation: use the standard per-channel linear projection by default; reach for something more elaborate only when the task calls for it.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Jun 2026.

Builds on

19 of 24 references.

References · 19

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2020DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attentioncited by 2,157
  3. 2020Informer: Beyond Efficient Transformer for Long Sequence Time-Series Forecastingcited by 2,141
  4. 2022A Time Series is Worth 64 Words: Long-term Forecasting with Transformerscited by 1,981
  5. 2022Are Transformers Effective for Time Series Forecasting?cited by 1,400
  6. 2016Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probescited by 1,279
  7. 2022TimesNet: Temporal 2D-Variation Modeling for General Time Series Analysiscited by 1,030
  8. 2022Toy Models of Superpositioncited by 928
  9. 2020On Layer Normalization in the Transformer Architecturecited by 906
  10. 2023iTransformer: Inverted Transformers Are Effective for Time Series Forecastingcited by 906
  11. 2019Temporal Fusion Transformers for Interpretable Multi-horizon Time Series Forecastingcited by 748
  12. 2023TSMixer: An All-MLP Architecture for Time Series Forecastingcited by 232
7 more
  1. 2020Rethinking Positional Encoding in Language Pre-trainingcited by 197
  2. 2023The Capacity and Robustness Trade-off: Revisiting the Channel Independent Strategy for Multivariate Time Series Forecastingcited by 100
  3. 2021Learnable Fourier Features for Multi-Dimensional Spatial Positional Encodingcited by 93
  4. 2025A Comprehensive Survey of Deep Learning for Multivariate Time Series Forecasting: A Channel Strategy Perspectivecited by 58
  5. 2025Positional Encoding in Transformer-Based Time Series Models: A Surveycited by 13
  6. 2025TimeRecipe: A Time-Series Forecasting Recipe via Benchmarking Module Level Effectivenesscited by 6
  7. 2026Representational Capacity: Geometric Limits on Feature Representation in Transformer Language Modelscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.