KITS: Inductive Spatio-Temporal Kriging with Increment Training Strategy
Qianxiong Xu, Cheng Long, Ziyue Li, Sijie Ruan, Rui Zhao, Zhishuai Li

TL;DR
KITS introduces an incremental training strategy with virtual nodes and pseudo labels to improve inductive spatio-temporal kriging, effectively addressing the graph gap issue and outperforming existing methods significantly.
Contribution
The paper proposes a novel Increment training strategy with virtual nodes and pseudo labels to enhance generalization in inductive kriging models.
Findings
KITS outperforms existing methods with up to 18.33% MAE improvement.
The virtual node approach effectively mitigates the graph gap issue.
Experimental results validate the robustness and superiority of KITS.
Abstract
Sensors are commonly deployed to perceive the environment. However, due to the high cost, sensors are usually sparsely deployed. Kriging is the tailored task to infer the unobserved nodes (without sensors) using the observed source nodes (with sensors). The essence of kriging task is transferability. Recently, several inductive spatio-temporal kriging methods have been proposed based on graph neural networks, being trained based on a graph built on top of observed nodes via pretext tasks such as masking nodes out and reconstructing them. However, the graph in training is inevitably much sparser than the graph in inference that includes all the observed and unobserved nodes. The learned pattern cannot be well generalized for inference, denoted as graph gap. To address this issue, we first present a novel Increment training strategy: instead of masking nodes (and reconstructing them), we…
Peer Reviews
Decision·Submitted to ICLR 2024
Admittedly, I am not a domain expert for inductive spatio-temporal kriging methods based on GNN, I do find this paper is: * Well-written, and enjoyable to read. * This looks like a novel method to address the sparsity gap between training graph and inference graph.
* My main concern is that the introduction of virtual nodes does not add additional information to the dataset. Consequently, my intuition is that this strategy is more effective when the dataset size is small. In the case of the benchmark datasets, which contain a limited number of spatial data points (ranging from a maximum of 883 to a minimum of 80), the approach seems advantageous. However, in scenarios where there is a larger denser spatial dataset, it's worth considering whether the issue
The presented ideas are refreshingly interesting & novel to me. The problem being addressed is also practically significant. The gap between the train and test graphs in the inductive setting of node prediction is always a fundamental issue, which needs an in-depth treatment. The empirical studies are sufficiently extensive, showing good results across a variety of datasets. Comprehensive ablation studies showing the effectiveness of each idea is also included.
Overall, I like this paper. It motivates well a fundamental issue of inductive inference with GCN. But I do have a few concerns or questions regarding both the position, presentation and empirical evaluation of this paper that I want to discuss with the authors (mostly out of curiosity & for constructive feedback) 1. The main position of this paper is grounded in the spatio-temporal setting but the proposed treatment does not seem to have anything specific to the temporal aspect. The aggregati
* The introduced data augmentation strategy paired with the self-supervised training routine is novel and appealing. * Good empirical performance. * Very good presentation.
* There is a conceptual flaw in the main motivation behind the introduced methodology. While it is straightforward to see why using a drastically different graph at training and inference time is a problem ("graph gap" in the paper), I do not understand why every target node should be reconstructed in a single forward pass. * Reconstructing a single node at a time would remove the "graph gap", this would be the proper way of carrying out the evaluation. * After removing nodes for training, graph
Code & Models
Videos
Taxonomy
TopicsCryospheric studies and observations · Geographic Information Systems Studies · Remote-Sensing Image Classification
MethodsMasked autoencoder
