Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
184,937 studies31 sourcesUpdated 7 min ago
PreprintCC BY 4.0arXiv

Target-Constrained Pooling for Trajectory Extrapolation

Abstract

Trajectory extrapolation from a partial target trajectory is underdetermined, but completed related trajectories provide information about the unresolved continuation. We propose target-constrained pooling (TCP), which separates the finite-horizon endpoint from continuation shape and estimates that endpoint from two complementary source signals. Uniform pooling captures final response levels, while matched-increment pooling captures the remaining change after aligning source and target states. TCP selects representative sources, projects both endpoint estimates onto a target-consistent region, converts them into corrections of the free forecast, and controls their influence through strength calibration and degradation-aware weighting. Across 25,245 targets from five domains and both forecasting directions, TCP reduces mean RMSE by 35.8% to 42.1% for all ten target-only forecasters and improves all 100 forecaster, dataset, and direction comparisons. The two endpoint signals consistently outperform either alone, while representative selection remains within 0.64% to 1.02% of the full donor pool using 12.7x fewer donor inputs and 138.8x fewer matching distance computations.

Related

  1. Interval-Constrained Brownian Paths: Exact Interpolation and Extrapolation
    Radu Herbei, Kumar Somnath
    arXivPreprintCC BY-NC-ND 4.0Full textProbabilityStatisticsarXiv
  2. Distribution-Agnostic Robust Trajectory Optimization via Chance-Constrained Reinforcement Learning
    Yashdeep Chaudhary, Roberto Armellin, Harry Holt +1
    arXivPreprintarXiv licenceFull textOptimisation & controlarXiv
  3. Trajectory Parameterization and Evolutionary Search for Constrained Optimal Control
    Moataz Ahmed
    MathematicsPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0General mathematicsCrossref
  4. Target-Generated Dirichlet Problems in State-Constrained Stochastic Control
    Erhan Bayraktar, Haichuan Ding, Ibrahim Ekren
    arXivPreprintarXiv licenceFull textOptimisation & controlProbabilityarXiv
  5. Age-Optimal Target Wake Time: Provably Good Wake Schedules for Energy-Constrained Wi-Fi Status Updating
    Haoyu Wang, Bo Sheng, Xiaoqian Zhang
    arXivPreprintarXiv licenceFull textGeneral mathematicsarXiv
BibTeX
@misc{wang2026targetconstrained,
  title = {{Target-Constrained Pooling for Trajectory Extrapolation}},
  author = {Ning Wang and Claire Cardie and Sainyam Galhotra},
  howpublished = {arXiv},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2610.13034},
  eprint = {2610.13034},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.13034},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - Target-Constrained Pooling for Trajectory Extrapolation
AU  - Ning Wang
AU  - Claire Cardie
AU  - Sainyam Galhotra
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/09
PB  - arXiv
DO  - 10.48550/arxiv.2610.13034
UR  - https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.13034
AB  - Trajectory extrapolation from a partial target trajectory is underdetermined, but completed related trajectories provide information about the unresolved continuation. We propose target-constrained pooling (TCP), which separates the finite-horizon endpoint from continuation shape and estimates that endpoint from two complementary source signals. Uniform pooling captures final response levels, while matched-increment pooling captures the remaining change after aligning source and target states. TCP selects representative sources, projects both endpoint estimates onto a target-consistent region, converts them into corrections of the free forecast, and controls their influence through strength calibration and degradation-aware weighting. Across 25,245 targets from five domains and both forecasting directions, TCP reduces mean RMSE by 35.8% to 42.1% for all ten target-only forecasters and improves all 100 forecaster, dataset, and direction comparisons. The two endpoint signals consistently outperform either alone, while representative selection remains within 0.64% to 1.02% of the full donor pool using 12.7x fewer donor inputs and 138.8x fewer matching distance computations.
ER  -