mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Do We Really Need Adaptive Global Spatial Attention for Traffic Forecasting?

arXiv 2607.12462 ↗First posted 14 Jul 2026cs.AIcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Existing traffic forecasting models commonly focus on extracting spatial dependencies, particularly global spatial information, which characterizes the representations obtained through interactions between each node and all nodes across the traffic network. However, the underlying mechanism by which global information is modeled and extracted remains insufficiently investigated. Whether global information must be extracted by high-degree-of-freedom adaptive attention or can be captured by a simple global aggregation operator remains unclear. For this purpose, we design a controlled ablation framework that replaces only the spatial mixing module to test attention-based global interaction. Across six traffic benchmarks, standard spatial attention yields relative MAE changes of -1.58% to +1.26% compared with uniform full-range mixing, and we observe no consistent advantage for standard spatial attention, while uniform full-range mixing reduces node-scale spatial-mixing complexity from O(N2) to O(N). We further propose a hypothesized model that decomposes spatial attention into a row-uniform global background and a non-uniform residual. The residual shows dataset-dependent effects. Overall, uniform full-range mixing provides a strong global spatial baseline, while the non-uniform attention residual is not consistently beneficial across datasets.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Jul 2026.

Builds on

23 of 39 references.

References · 23

  1. 2017Non-local Neural Networkscited by 2,293
  2. 2019Simplifying Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 1,477
  3. 2021MLP-Mixer: An all-MLP Architecture for Visioncited by 1,446
  4. 2022Are Transformers Effective for Time Series Forecasting?cited by 1,424
  5. 2017Spatio-Temporal Graph Convolutional Networks: A Deep Learning Framework for Traffic Forecastingcited by 1,136
  6. 2019Graph WaveNet for Deep Spatial-Temporal Graph Modelingcited by 829
  7. 2020Connecting the Dots: Multivariate Time Series Forecasting with Graph Neural Networkscited by 566
  8. 2020Adaptive Graph Convolutional Recurrent Network for Traffic Forecastingcited by 530
  9. 2019GMAN: A Graph Multi-Attention Network for Traffic Predictioncited by 434
  10. 2021FNet: Mixing Tokens with Fourier Transformscited by 347
  11. 2019GCNet: Non-local Networks Meet Squeeze-Excitation Networks and Beyondcited by 331
  12. 2021Spatial-Temporal Graph ODE Networks for Traffic Flow Forecastingcited by 210
11 more
  1. 2020Spatial-Temporal Transformer Networks for Traffic Flow Forecastingcited by 180
  2. 2022Spatial-Temporal Identity: A Simple yet Effective Baseline for Multivariate Time Series Forecastingcited by 151
  3. 2023PDFormer: Propagation Delay-Aware Dynamic Long-Range Transformer for Traffic Flow Predictioncited by 137
  4. 2021Graph Neural Controlled Differential Equations for Traffic Forecastingcited by 133
  5. 2020FC-GAGA: Fully Connected Gated Graph Architecture for Spatio-Temporal Traffic Forecastingcited by 30
  6. 2024Efficient Large-Scale Traffic Forecasting with Transformers: A Spatial Data Management Perspectivecited by 26
  7. 2023MLPST: MLP is All You Need for Spatio-Temporal Predictioncited by 22
  8. 2023Do We Really Need Graph Neural Networks for Traffic Forecasting?cited by 20
  9. 2022Scratching Visual Transformer's Back with Uniform Attentioncited by 16
  10. 2024STD-PLM: Understanding Both Spatial and Temporal Properties of Spatial-Temporal Data with PLMcited by 10
  11. 2024Enhancing Topological Dependencies in Spatio-Temporal Graphs with Cycle Message Passing Blockscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.