PapersWithELO
← ICLR 2024 leaderboard

Continual Traffic Forecasting via Mixture of Experts

SangHyun Lee, Chanyoung Park

transfer & meta learningcontinual learningspatio-temporal forecastingtraffic forecasting
18.10100
Fused
band ≈ ±14 pct pts (from σ = 0.28)
28.70100
Mimo
band ≈ ±20 pct pts (from σ = 0.40)
8.50100
DeepSeek
band ≈ ±20 pct pts (from σ = 0.40)

OpenReview ground truth

Rejected

Abstract

The real-world traffic networks undergo expansion through the installation of new sensors, implying that the traffic patterns continually evolve over time. Incrementally training a model on the newly added sensors would make the model forget the past knowledge, i.e., catastrophic forgetting, while retraining the model on the entire network to capture these changes is highly inefficient. To address these challenges, we propose a novel Traffic Forecasting Mixture of Experts (\proposed) for traffic forecasting under evolving networks. The main idea is to segment the traffic flow into multiple homogeneous groups, and assign an expert model responsible for a specific group. This allows each expert model to concentrate on learning and adapting to a specific set of patterns, while minimizing interference between the experts during training, thereby preventing the dilution or replacement of prior knowledge, which is a major cause of catastrophic forgetting. Through extensive experiments on a real-world long-term streaming network dataset, PEMSD3-Stream, we demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of~\proposed. Our results showcase superior performance and resilience in the face of catastrophic forgetting, underscoring the effectiveness of our approach in dealing with continual learning for traffic flow forecasting in long-term streaming networks.

Author context

Most prolific author: 6 submissions (credibility 1.00).

No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).

Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.

Ranking trajectory

Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.

Battle history — 34 comparisons

Ranked above opponent in 39% of matchups.

Judge assessments

Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 34)