Skip to content

B0.0 — Crosses calibration

37 of 60 configurations beat the hub ensemble under the historical combined score. anchor__stopping_300_0 ranks first at 0.8924, but scores 1.688 on 2023–2024 influenza admissions. Results depend on the season and location weights.

Experiment and score

60 configurations × 3 seeds = 180 season-CV runs and 540 season fits. Stored experiment: b0-us-cross-4. The suite tests one-factor changes around three reference recipes after the per-location input scaling fix (11a23ea). The legacy run is superseded.

This page retains the historical score:

  1. For each target and season, divide total model WIS by total ensemble WIS on matching tasks, pooling locations, dates and horizons 0–3.
  2. Average season ratios within each target.
  3. Combine targets with weight 2 for admissions and 1 for ED visits.
  4. Report the mean and SD across three seeds.

Lower is better; 1 means parity with the hub ensemble. This differs from the later objective with equal seasons, location-relative WIS and 20% US weight. See B0.1 for a comparison using rescored B0.0 forecasts.

Reference Recipe Combined score Rank
raw Historical raw-count B0, 8 weeks, no geography/dynamics 1.0199 46
anchor Fourth-root, geography, dynamics, 12 weeks, shared MLP, latent 16 0.9701 24
conv Anchor + convolution, residual decoder, latent 32, spatial attention, local noise, separate heads, logit ED 0.9215 4

Ranking

Rank Configuration Combined (mean ± seed SD) States/DC US
1 anchor__stopping_300_0 0.8924 ± 0.0327 0.9062 0.8879
2 conv__decoder_leg 0.9069 ± 0.0233 0.9003 1.1895
3 anchor__stopping_100_0 0.9150 ± 0.0366 0.9351 0.9374
4 conv (reference) 0.9215 ± 0.0480 0.8988 1.2507
5 conv__us_error_shf 0.9291 ± 0.0674 0.9282 1.1770
6 anchor__stopping_300_20 0.9293 ± 0.0269 0.9593 0.9824

40 of 60 configurations beat the ensemble on states/DC tasks; 5 of 60 do so on US tasks. Scores and seed variation for the full suite:

Combined score for all 60 configurations, with individual seeds

Seed noise against leaderboard spread, and per-seed rank reshuffling

Training length and season

Family ep50 ep100 ep300 ep300 + patience 20
raw 1.0199 1.0391 1.0360 1.0202
anchor 0.9701 0.9150 0.8924 0.9293
conv 0.9215 0.9666 0.9939 0.9530

Longer training lowers the combined score for anchor and raises it for conv. The improvement for anchor does not hold in every season:

Configuration 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 Overall
anchor__stopping_300_0 1.688 (51) 0.832 (7) 0.837 (1) 0.8924 (1)
conv__decoder_leg 1.145 (21) 0.811 (3) 0.925 (3) 0.9069 (2)
anchor__stopping_100_0 1.229 (30) 0.865 (13) 0.889 (2) 0.9150 (3)
conv 0.966 (10) 0.865 (12) 0.969 (28) 0.9215 (4)
conv__us_error_shf 1.107 (20) 0.846 (8) 0.962 (17) 0.9291 (5)
anchor__stopping_300_20 0.946 (5) 0.778 (1) 0.960 (14) 0.9293 (6)
anchor__us_error_shf 0.985 (12) 0.848 (11) 0.965 (22) 0.9445 (7)
anchor__decoder_res2 0.879 (1) 0.905 (21) 0.960 (15) 0.9518 (8)
conv__encoder_mlp 1.213 (27) 0.830 (6) 0.967 (23) 0.9518 (9)
conv__stopping_300_20 1.172 (26) 0.848 (10) 1.014 (45) 0.9530 (10)
anchor__ed_transform_4rt 0.896 (2) 0.976 (45) 0.972 (30) 0.9604 (11)
conv__count_transform_log1p 1.514 (39) 0.925 (25) 0.927 (4) 0.9613 (12)

At 300 epochs, adding patience 20 lowers the 2023–2024 score from 1.688 to 0.946, while raising the combined score from 0.8924 to 0.9293. These results show a tradeoff across seasons; they do not establish its cause.

The scored season is excluded from fitting and scaling. Early stopping uses validation data within the training seasons.

Training-length ladder by reference family

Weighting comparison and per-season ranks

One-factor changes

Deltas compare each configuration with its own reference; negative is better.

Anchor

Change Δ combined Δ states Δ US
stopping_300_0 −0.0777 −0.0811 −0.1773
stopping_100_0 −0.0550 −0.0522 −0.1277
stopping_300_20 −0.0408 −0.0280 −0.0827
us_error_shf −0.0256 −0.0211 −0.0430
decoder_res2 −0.0183 −0.0193 −0.0461
ed_transform_4rt −0.0097 −0.0149 −0.0627
count_transform_raw +0.0214 +0.0153 −0.0608
count_transform_rate +0.0205 +0.0144 −0.0617

Convolution

Change Δ combined Δ states Δ US
decoder_leg −0.0145 +0.0015 −0.0612
us_error_shf +0.0076 +0.0294 −0.0737
encoder_mlp +0.0303 +0.0415 −0.0707
heads_sh +0.0458 +0.0699 −0.1651
geography_0 +0.0997 +0.0755 +0.1226
ed_transform_lin +0.1024 +0.1014 −0.0387
dynamics_0 +0.1150 +0.1539 +0.0553
ed_transform_4rt +0.1159 +0.1331 −0.1176

Raw

Change Δ combined Δ states Δ US
lookback_12 −0.0558 −0.0365 −0.0962
latent_32 −0.0414 −0.0372 −0.0647
count_transform_log1p −0.0346 −0.0199 −0.0225
count_transform_4rt −0.0309 −0.0217 −0.0122
encoder_conv +0.0287 +0.0275 +0.0579
noise_loc +0.0313 +0.0260 +0.0385

Effects depend on the reference. For example, convolution raises the score on raw and anchor, while the bundled conv reference ranks fourth overall. The reference ranking cannot isolate the contribution of convolution.

Location weights

The historical score pools WIS across locations. The US contributes 47.2% of influenza-admissions WIS. Averaging the 52 location-specific ratios equally reduces its weight to 1/52 and changes the ranking:

Configuration Equal-weight 52 (± seed SD) Rank WIS-sum Rank Shift
conv__decoder_leg 0.9591 ± 0.0201 1 0.9069 2 +1
conv 0.9601 ± 0.0253 2 0.9215 4 +2
anchor__stopping_300_0 0.9620 ± 0.0255 3 0.8924 1 −2
conv__count_transform_log1p 0.9832 ± 0.0500 4 0.9613 12 +8
conv__stopping_300_20 0.9844 ± 0.0370 5 0.9530 10 +5
anchor__stopping_100_0 0.9870 ± 0.0177 6 0.9150 3 −3
conv__stopping_300_0 0.9938 ± 0.0323 7 0.9939 36 +29
conv__us_error_shf 0.9957 ± 0.0702 8 0.9291 5 −3
conv__stopping_100_0 0.9996 ± 0.0661 9 0.9666 18 +9
conv__encoder_mlp 1.0006 ± 0.0270 10 0.9518 9 −1

Under equal location weights, 9 of 60 configurations beat the ensemble, compared with 37 under the historical score. None beat it in all three seasons. This equal-location score also differs from B0.1's 20% US weighting.

States/DC versus US combined score, by family

Coverage and horizon

Coverage percentages averaged over all 180 runs; each cell gives model / ensemble:

Target 50% states (model/ens) 95% states 50% US 95% US
Flu admissions 36.7 / 51.2 77.7 / 88.0 39.5 / 49.7 80.3 / 86.8
COVID admissions 38.5 / 52.3 79.3 / 94.2 42.8 / 60.7 87.6 / 97.6
RSV admissions 38.7 / 42.8 77.5 / 88.9 41.8 / 49.1 84.0 / 92.2
Flu ED visits 40.7 / 53.9 84.9 / 90.3 41.7 / 67.0 78.0 / 89.3
COVID ED visits 34.1 / 52.0 80.8 / 93.5 31.6 / 78.2 82.6 / 100.0
RSV ED visits 46.2 / 48.1 88.2 / 89.4 45.0 / 65.8 82.2 / 97.3

Coverage is below nominal levels for all reported target/geography combinations. No interval calibration was applied. Coverage alone does not identify the cause of the errors.

Coverage by target and geography against nominal levels

Total WIS ratio by horizon

For anchor__stopping_300_0, states/DC WIS ratios rise from 0.861 at horizon 0 to 0.999 at horizon 3; US ratios rise from 0.781 to 1.042.

Fan plots

United States on the left, North Carolina on the right. Rows show the three leading configurations at their median-scoring seed (s44) and the hub ensemble. Every third forecast origin is drawn against frozen truth.

Influenza admissions 2023-2024

Influenza admissions 2024-2025

Influenza admissions 2025-2026

COVID-19 admissions 2024-2025

COVID-19 admissions 2025-2026

RSV admissions 2025-2026

Influenza ED visits 2025-2026

COVID-19 ED visits 2025-2026

RSV ED visits 2025-2026

Member trajectories

50 of the rank-1 configuration's 100 saved members per origin:

Member trajectories, influenza admissions 2024-2025

Assumptions and limitations

  • These are retrospective fits on finalized data, using NSSP values as truth. Earlier held-out seasons can have later seasons in their training set.
  • All three seasons inform model selection; the ranking is not an independent evaluation of the selected model.
  • Target coverage differs by season: 2023–2024 has influenza admissions only, 2024–2025 adds COVID admissions, and 2025–2026 has all six targets.
  • Three seeds describe run-to-run variation. Their SD is not a significance threshold for differences between configurations.
  • One-factor changes apply to their reference recipes; the suite does not estimate all interactions.
  • Runs include mixed clean/dirty source states. The recorded review found no model-code differences; publication results need a clean rerun.
  • This rewrite retains the reported numerical results; it does not recompute scores.

Reproducing

Historical ranking artifacts are in data/experiments/b0-us-cross-4/ranking-2739af8db682/. The plotting command uses that saved ranking:

.venv/bin/python scripts/plot_b0_crosses.py -e b0-us-cross-4 -r ranking-2739af8db682

Current scoring uses a different objective. See the postprocessing workflow and the B0.1 reproduction notes for rescoring. The follow-up design is in B0 after crosses: next steps.

Log

  • 2026-09-15: Reran the suite after replacing pooled input scaling with per-location scaling (11a23ea). The legacy fit artifacts were deleted.
  • 2026-09-16: Shortened the report. Removed repeated analysis and explanations of overfitting, distribution shift and interval errors that the comparisons did not establish. Retained the historical score and figures.