Skip to content

How Good Are Time-Series Foundation Models for Pedestrian Crowd Count Forecasting? A Cross-Dataset Comparative Study

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 24 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

Seasonal Naive remains a strong baseline for long-horizon forecasting on high-volume sensors, while trained models can degrade when the next day differs substantially from prior days, and FMs excel in the seasonal and data-rich regime under long-context configuration.

Abstract

Pedestrian-count forecasting supports pedestrian-oriented Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), including crowd monitoring, pedestrian-traffic staffing and routing, and proactive risk mitigation during surges. Recent time-series foundation models (FMs) report strong zero-shot accuracy on heterogeneous forecasting benchmarks, but it remains unclear whether these gains transfer reliably to pedestrian sensing deployments. We benchmark seven univariate forecasting approaches spanning four paradigms: Seasonal Naive, gradient-boosted trees (LightGBM, CatBoost), deep learning models (N-HiTS, PatchTST), and two pretrained FMs (TimesFM, Chronos-2). Experiments cover two complementary regimes: (i) a five-day special event dataset SAIL2025 at 3-minute resolution with limited in-domain history; and (ii) Melbourne pedestrian sensors as a multi-year hourly dataset (2010--2017) with strong seasonality. We compare the MAE and RMSE results per sensor across datasets and multiple forecast horizons. Results show three consistent findings. First, with limited historical data, Seasonal Naive remains a strong baseline for long-horizon forecasting on high-volume sensors, while trained models can degrade when the next day differs substantially from prior days. Second, boosted trees can be competitive on lower-volume sensors but exhibit higher sensitivity on high-volume sensors under event-driven shift. Third, FMs excel in the seasonal and data-rich regime under long-context configuration. The findings highlight the importance of choosing pedestrian forecasting models based on both the underlying data conditions and the forecasting horizon.

View source

Similar papers

#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54

Diffusion models as plug-and-play priors

The possibility of inferring high-dimensional data inference in a model that consists of a prior and an auxiliary differentiable constraint given some additional information is considered, thereby allowing a range of potential applications in adapting models to new domains and tasks.

Alexandros Graikos, Esmeralda S. Whitammer, N. Jojic et al. · 316 citations · ⚡15

Trajectory Balance: Improved Credit Assignment in GFlowNets

It is proved that any global minimizer of the trajectory balance objective can define a policy that samples exactly from the target distribution, and empirically demonstrate the benefits of the trajectories balance objective for GFlowNet convergence, diversity of generated samples, and robustness to long action sequenc...

Esmeralda S. Whitammer, Moksh Jain, Emmanuel Bengio et al. · 302 citations · ⚡60
#artificial intelligence Open access May 2023

Evaluating the Performance of Large Language Models on GAOKAO Benchmark

GAOKAO-Bench is introduced, an intuitive benchmark that employs questions from the Chinese GAOKAO examination as test samples, including both subjective and objective questions that contribute a robust evaluation benchmark for future large language models and offers valuable insights into the advantages and limitations...

Xiaotian Zhang, Chun-yan Li, Yi Zong et al. · 216 citations · ⚡17

KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimization

This work proposes a HALO that directly maximizes the utility of generations instead of maximizing the log-likelihood of preferences, and suggests that the best loss depends on the inductive biases most appropriate for a given setting, an oft-overlooked consideration.

Kawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff et al. · 195 citations · ⚡28

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Sep 29, 2026

Who we become when we talk to machines

Professor Sherry Turkle’s new book, “Artificial Intimacy,” offers a withering critique of chatbots and the antisocial dynamics she believes they encourage.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.