DeNOTS: Stable Deep Neural ODEs for Time Series
Ilya Kuleshov, Evgenia Romanenkova, Vladislav Zhuzhel, Galina Boeva, Evgeni Vorsin, Alexey Zaytsev

TL;DR
DeNOTS introduces a novel method for stabilizing and deepening neural ODEs for time series, improving expressiveness and robustness without sacrificing stability, and demonstrates significant performance gains on multiple datasets.
Contribution
The paper proposes a new approach to increase neural ODE depth by scaling the integration horizon and stabilizing dynamics with Negative Feedback, ensuring stability and improved performance.
Findings
Outperforms existing models by up to 20% on four datasets
Provides theoretical bounds for Neural ODE risk using Gaussian process theory
Achieves a balance of expressiveness, stability, and robustness in continuous-time modeling
Abstract
Neural CDEs provide a natural way to process the temporal evolution of irregular time series. The number of function evaluations (NFE) is these systems' natural analog of depth (the number of layers in traditional neural networks). It is usually regulated via solver error tolerance: lower tolerance means higher numerical precision, requiring more integration steps. However, lowering tolerances does not adequately increase the models' expressiveness. We propose a simple yet effective alternative: scaling the integration time horizon to increase NFEs and "deepen`` the model. Increasing the integration interval causes uncontrollable growth in conventional vector fields, so we also propose a way to stabilize the dynamics via Negative Feedback (NF). It ensures provable stability without constraining flexibility. It also implies robustness: we provide theoretical bounds for Neural ODE risk…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2026 Poster
1.Novel Time Scaling Approach: The idea of scaling the integration time range to increase NFE without increasing weight norms is conceptually interesting and has potential to improve model expressivity. 2.Practical Performance: The experimental results demonstrate that DENOTS outperforms several baseline methods on multiple datasets, showing practical utility. 3.Stability Considerations: The inclusion of negative feedback mechanisms to address stability issues in neural ODEs is a thoughtful cont
1.Restrictive Assumptions: The theoretical analysis relies on restrictive assumptions (e.g., Assumptions 4.1 and 4.2) that may not hold in practice. The authors do not sufficiently discuss the rationality and limitations of these assumptions. 2.D/M Ratio Problem: The paper provides insufficient details on how to select D and M values, particularly regarding the determination of the D/M ratio. More specific parameter selection guidelines and analysis of how the D/M ratio affects model performance
try to study an important problem with theoreical motivaiton, to improve expreisivty and stalbity.
1. I am not convinced by the theoretical results and analysis. Theorem 3.1 shows that a larger integration horizon $T$ leads to a larger $L_F$, but this merely indicates greater output variance, not increased expressivity. To rigorously support the claim that longer integration time enhances expressivity, the authors should establish a functional inclusion relation between model families; e.g., for two horizons $T<T'$, show that the corresponding function classes $H_T \leq H_{T'}$. Without such
This article employs a variety of theoretical tools and proposes a straightforward and easy-to-use methodological innovation (time scaling and negative feedback).
Although this article is based on theoretical analysis, I am somewhat skeptical about whether they can correctly validate its arguments. In my view, it is not entirely logically rigorous. The specific details are listed in the Questions part.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsNeural Networks and Applications
MethodsGaussian Process
