Benchmark study demonstrates superior cross-intersection transfer for time-series foundation models on urban arterials, indicating their value in fine-grained traffic management.
Large language models (LLMs) and time-series foundation models have advanced traffic forecasting, but almost exclusively on freeway sensors at five-minute, aggregate-flow resolution; their behavior on minute-resolution, movement-level counts at signalized arterials is unknown. This study assembled a real corridor dataset—6449 gap-free one-minute turning-movement records (255,364 counted vehicles) at 20 signalized intersections along 13 miles of Nolensville Pike, Nashville, Tennessee—and ran a controlled benchmark across three model families (classical, deep, and LLM/foundation models). We evaluate in-sample accuracy at 5/10/15 min horizons (RQ1), cross-date leave-intersection-out transfer to morning-only sites (RQ2). On the full-day sites, a per-series ARIMA attains the best short-horizon accuracy (MASE 0.87 at h = 5), while a zero-shot foundation model (Chronos) is the most stable across horizons; under leave-intersection-out transfer the ordering reverses—foundation models transfer best (MASE ≈ 0.61, improving to ≈0.56 with few-shot adaptation) whereas globally trained deep networks fail catastrophically (MASE > 4). All benchmark values reported here are measured on the corridor data; foundation-model families that we could not execute end-to-end in this environment are discussed qualitatively and are not included in the quantitative comparison. The dataset and protocol establish an honest, cost-aware basis for judging whether language and foundation models genuinely forecast an urban corridor at minute resolution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chimba et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: