Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
Cadence pairs Google's 330M-parameter TimesFM-3 foundation model with an adaptive range coder to execute error-bounded lossy compression ($|\hat{x}_t-x_t|\le\tau$) on continuous demand time series. While foundation models yield negligible gains (+0.03%) in lossless compression due to logarithmic bit savings over MAE, error-bounded quantization exploits near-zero residual coding costs whenever a forecast falls within the specified error band. Evaluated on out-of-sample 2026 demand and ridership datasets, Cadence achieved a 21.4% median bit-rate reduction over classical linear predictors across all 297 test configurations and delivered 28–56× tighter worst-case error guarantees than standard database downsampling.
Foundation models are practically useless for lossless time-series compression, yet shifting to error-bounded lossy regimes lets them outperform classical predictors across the board by collapsing in-band residual costs to zero.
We present Cadence, an error-bounded lossy compressor for numeric time series pairing a 330M-parameter time-series foundation model (Google TimesFM-3) with an adaptive arithmetic coder, guaranteeing $|\hat{x}_t-x_t|\le\tau$ on every sample. One negative result constrains the design space: for lossless coding a foundation model is worth nothing, because bits saved are logarithmic in predictor accuracy, $\Delta b=\log_2(\mathrm{MAE_{old}}/\mathrm{MAE_{new}})$. So the $1.51\times$ advantage TimesFM-3 holds over a 32-tap linear predictor buys 0.60 bits of 20.28, a median gain of +0.03%. Error-bounded coding escapes this at one point: once a forecast lands inside the band the residual index is zero and the sample nearly free. Cadence contributes: (1) an adaptive range coder with context-modelled binarization, beating xz/zstd on real indices by 9.7% (15/15) and reversing a finding from a general-purpose back end; (2) a determinism result -- predictions are not bit-identical across batch sizes, and no PyTorch configuration repairs this, forcing group size and execution device into the container format; and (3) domain localization on corpora postdating any plausible training cutoff. On 49 EIA-930 balancing-authority demand series (2026) Cadence gains 13.3% over the best of six classical predictors, and 28.3% on 50 MTA ridership series (2026): 21.4% median over 297 series-tolerance pairs, winning all 297. Against downsampling, what time-series databases deploy for retention, its guaranteed worst-case error is $28$--$56\times$ tighter at equal size. End-to-end, once the context bootstrap is paid for, gains run from 6.8% at six months of hourly data to 15.1% asymptotically. Attempting to falsify the domain claim on SDRBench, theory predicts failure and delivers: -0.8% median, 0 of 27 pairs gaining. Three further negative results and eight retracted claims are reported in full.
