store-sales-darts-chronos-blend
Skill5 starsChanged 37 days agoMITView on GitHub
Blend a foundation model (Chronos-2) with a tree model (darts LightGBMModel) for Kaggle Store Sales time-series forecasting. Validated 2026-07-26: Chronos-2 ensemble (LB 0.39387) + darts per-family LightGBM top-1 method (LB 0.39953) → geometric blend w=0.55 → **LB RMSLE 0.38444** (best, -0.012 vs single-model). Use when: (1) Forecasting competitions with multi-series data, (2) Single strong model has plateaued and you need a breakthrough, (3) You can train two INDEPENDENT algorithm-family models (neural + tree). Key insight: same-family blends are useless (Chronos v1+v2 correlation >0.99 → no gain), but cross-family blends give large gains even when both models score similarly. Differs from `autogluon-timeseries-strategy` (single Chronos-2 route) — this skill covers the multi-model BLEND that breaks the single-model ceiling.
In this repository63 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- adversarial-validation-kaggleSkill
- agent-nurture-frameworkSkill
- agent-session-memory-protocolSkill
- arxiv-paper-searchSkill
- autogluon-firstSkill
- autogluon-preset-strategySkill
- autogluon-timeseries-strategySkill
- catboost-first-tabularSkill
- claudeceptionSkill
- code-competition-artifact-pipelineSkill
- competition-orchestration-multimodelSkill
- context-engineeringSkill
- controlled-submission-experimentSkill
- cross-competition-feature-transferSkill
- cv-lb-gap-acknowledgmentSkill
- domain-knowledge-constraints-trapSkill
- ensemble-model-correlation-trapSkill
- feature-engineering-saturation-detectionSkill
- gpu-readiness-assessmentSkill
- gsd-loop-engineeringSkill
- kaggle-cognitive-cost-optimizationSkill
- kaggle-competition-best-practicesSkill
- kaggle-competition-type-strategySkill
- kaggle-data-format-firstSkill
- kaggle-discussion-searchSkill
- kaggle-experiment-sopSkill
- kaggle-oof-lb-validation-protocolSkill
- kaggle-optimal-blendingSkill
- kaggle-submission-format-by-metricSkill
- kaggle-top-performer-replicationSkill
- knowledge-crystallization-feedback-loopSkill
- ladder-drift-and-meta-aware-regressionSkill
- learned-value-beats-heuristic-augmentationSkill
- llm-competition-pipelineSkill
- mcts-pipeline-searchSkill
- mem0-dynamic-graph-memorySkill
- memory-hierarchy-managementSkill
- ml-sweet-spot-principleSkill
- model-ensemble-negative-weight-effectSkill
- multi-agent-rolesSkill
- multi-level-aggregation-overfittingSkill
- okf-visualize-knowledgeSkill
- onnx-minimal-network-designSkill
- per-category-modeling-backfireSkill
- progressive-verification-debuggingSkill
- ptcg-2ply-bounded-searchSkill
- ptcg-bc-large-model-submissionSkill
- retail-eda-frameworkSkill
- rmsle-zero-threshold-asymmetrySkill
- runtime-reflexionSkill
- sc-tir-mathematical-reasoningSkill
- self-evolving-skillsSkill
- skill-governance-and-automationSkill
- spatiotemporal-graph-feature-engineeringSkill
- tabular-polynomial-features-breakthroughSkill
- three-layer-wisdom-extractionSkill
- time-series-walk-forward-validationSkill
- trueskill-simulation-competition-strategySkill
- ts-day-specific-forecastingSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 95
Per-family scaling calibration: only +0.8% theoretical gain.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Store Sales — darts + Chronos-2 Cross-Family Blend
The Core Insight (why this beats single models)
A single strong model hits a ceiling. Blending two models only helps if they are from different algorithm families (low correlation). Same-family blends are useless even when both models are individually strong.
| Blend | Correlation | Result |
| Chronos-2 v1 + Chronos-2 v2 (same family) | 0.997 | no gain (0.3939 → 0.3941) |
| Chronos-2 + darts-LightGBM (different families) | 0.997* | -0.009 gain (0.3939 → 0.3844) |
* Even at 0.997 correlation the blend helped, because the error patterns diverge where it matters (different families miss different samples).
The Two Routes
Route 1: AutoGluon Chronos-2 ensemble (neural foundation model)
TimeSeriesPredictorwith Chronos-2 (zero-shot + LoRA fine-tune) + Chronos-Bolt + DirectTabularnum_val_windows=5, local model paths to bypass HF download errors- Standalone LB: 0.39387
- See
autogluon-timeseries-strategyskill for Chronos-2 details
Route 2: darts LightGBM per-family (tree model, top-1 public method)
dartslibrary'sLightGBMModelwithoutput_chunk_length=1+predict(n=16)- darts handles recursive prediction AUTOMATICALLY — this is the critical advantage. Manual recursion (hand-written lag filling) is bug-prone: trend extrapolation blow-ups (4-7x too high), systematic under-prediction (-44%). darts' built-in recursion avoids all of these.
- Per-family training (33 models, each on 54 stores — cross-store correlation helps)
- Lag-config ensemble (7d / 365d / 730d / baseline, averaged)
- Post-processing: store-family with zero sales in last 21 days → forecast 0
- Standalone LB: 0.39953
from darts import TimeSeries
from darts.models import LightGBMModel
ts = TimeSeries.from_dataframe(df, time_col="date", value_cols="sales",
fill_missing_dates=True, freq="D", fillna_value=0)
model = LightGBMModel(lags=7, lags_future_covariates=(16, 1), output_chunk_length=1)
model.fit(series=[ts_store1, ts_store2, ...], # multi-series: all stores of one family
future_covariates=[cov_ts]*n_stores)
pred = model.predict(n=16, series=ts_store, future_covariates=cov_ts) # auto-recursiveThe Blend (geometric mean in log space)
RMSLE is a log-space metric, so blend in log space (geometric mean):
import numpy as np
# w = weight on Chronos-2, (1-w) on darts
blended = np.exp(w * np.log1p(chronos_pred) + (1-w) * np.log1p(darts_pred)) - 1Optimal weight found by sweep: w=0.55 (slightly favor Chronos-2, the stronger single model). The optimum is flat — w in [0.5, 0.6] all give ~0.3844-0.3846.
Empirical Results (Store Sales, 2026-07-26)
| Approach | LB RMSLE |
| AG 1.4 medium_quality (prior baseline) | 0.41852 |
| AG 1.5 Chronos-2 v1 (LoRA, 3 windows) | 0.39571 |
| AG 1.5 Chronos-2 v2 (+FullFT, 5 windows) | 0.39387 |
| darts LightGBM top-1 method | 0.39953 |
| Chronos-2 + darts blend (w=0.55) | 0.38444 |
What Did NOT Work (recorded to save future effort)
- Same-family blend (Chronos v1 + v2): 0.3941, no gain. Correlation too high.
- Hand-written LightGBM recursion (Route 2 without darts): systematic under-prediction (-44% on GROCERY I). Manual lag filling is the root cause.
- Hybrid Ridge-trend + LGB-residual: Ridge linear extrapolation blew up on test (PRODUCE predicted 4.3x too high, LB 0.71). Validation looked fine because validation has no extrapolation.
- Per-family scaling calibration: only +0.8% theoretical gain. Error isn't simple bias.
- 3rd model (darts XGBoost): correlation with LightGBM 0.996 → minimal additional blend gain. Same-family tree models don't add diversity.
Key Lessons
- Read the forum FIRST. The darts top-1 method was found in the competition discussion after hours of failing with hand-written recursion. Forum research is higher-ROI than model tuning.
- Use the right tool for recursion. darts
output_chunk_length=1+predict(n=horizon)is the correct abstraction. Never hand-write recursive lag filling for >1-step forecasts. - Cross-family blend > same-family stacking. Two mediocre independent models beat two correlated strong models.
- Geometric mean for RMSLE. Since RMSLE operates in log space, blend predictions with a log-space linear combination (geometric mean), not arithmetic mean.
- Post-processing matters. The 21-day-zero rule (force forecast=0 for store-families with all-zero last 21 days) is a free, safe gain from the winning writeup.
References
- Competition: https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/store-sales-time-series-forecasting
- Top-1 method (darts): https://inside-machinelearning.com/en/top-1-kaggle-my-method/
- AutoGluon Chronos-2 tutorial: https://auto.gluon.ai/stable/tutorials/timeseries/forecasting-chronos.html
- darts docs: https://unit8co.github.io/darts/
- Related skill:
autogluon-timeseries-strategy(single Chronos-2 route details)
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

