IJACMI

Article record

authors
Rohan Deshmukh1*, Arvind Kulkarni2, Mohd Faizal Ibrahim3
affiliations
1 School of Computing Science and Engineering (Research Scholar), VIT Bhopal University, Kothri Kalan, Sehore, Madhya Pradesh, India
2 School of Computing Science and Engineering, VIT Bhopal University, Kothri Kalan, Sehore, Madhya Pradesh, India
3 Faculty of Computing and Informatics, Multimedia University (MMU), Cyberjaya, Selangor, Malaysia
corresponding author
Rohan Deshmukh — rohan.deshmukh2024@vitbhopal.ac.in
pages
68-81
doi
10.5281/zenodo.23292852
received
18 July 2026
revised
26 August 2026
accepted
21 September 2026
published
26 September 2026
keywords
time-series forecasting; missing data; linear models; robustness; instance normalisation; data augmentation
licence
CC BY 4.0 — authors retain copyright in full
Abstract

Linear models are strong and inexpensive baselines for long-term time-series forecasting, but they are usually evaluated on complete input windows, whereas deployed sensor streams contain isolated dropouts and multi-hour outages. This paper examines how standard linear forecasters degrade when their inputs are incomplete and proposes MALin, a missingness-aware linear forecaster that adds three lightweight elements to a RevIN-linear model: instance normalisation computed from observed entries only, a linear branch driven by the missingness mask, and training on windows corrupted with random point and block missingness. MALin and seven baselines (naive repeat, ridge regression, DLinear with zero filling and with interpolation, NLinear, RLinear, and RLinear with missingness-augmented training) were evaluated on the ETTh1, ETTh2, and ETTm1 datasets at horizons of 96 to 720 steps, under point and block missingness at rates of 10–70%, with identical fixed test masks for all models. Interpolation made point missingness largely harmless, but 50% block missingness still increased the MSE of interpolated DLinear and RLinear by 30% and 33% on average. MALin reduced the error under 30–70% block missingness by 3.8% on average relative to RLinear and by up to 9.5% on ETTm1, without a systematic loss on complete inputs. Diebold–Mariano tests with Holm correction found MALin significantly better than RLinear in 24 of 48 block-missingness settings and significantly worse in none of the 108 settings tested. The gains were concentrated on ETTh1 and ETTm1, while MALin was slightly but not significantly worse on ETTh2. An ablation showed that missingness-augmented training and observed-only normalisation account for most of the improvement, whereas the mask branch helps only when gaps are zero-filled.

How to cite

Rohan Deshmukh, Arvind Kulkarni, Mohd Faizal Ibrahim (2026). Missingness-Aware Linear Forecasting for Long-Term Multivariate Time Series with Incomplete Inputs. International Journal of Advanced Computing and Machine Intelligence (IJACMI), 1(1), pp. 68-81. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.23292852