Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,203 studies31 sourcesUpdated 21 min ago
PreprintCC BY 4.0arXiv

Distributed Lag Neural Additive Models

Abstract

We introduce Distributed Lag Neural Additive Models (DLNAMs), neural-additive analogues of Distributed Lag Non-linear Models (DLNMs) for learning nonlinear effects distributed over lags. DLNAMs replace a prespecified spline cross-basis with neural components that learn exposure--lag response surfaces, avoiding choices of basis family, dimension, and knot placement while preserving additive interpretability and familiar distributed-lag summaries. Exp-centered input layers, smooth activations, and learned subnetwork mixtures produce smooth, locally adaptive representations; pointwise uncertainty combines a conditional last-layer Laplace approximation with between-member ensemble variation. In simulations, DLNAMs generally outperformed DLNM comparators, including penalized and treed variants, in recovering known response functions, with lower bias, stronger boundary recovery, and better-calibrated cumulative intervals; gains were largest for more demanding functions. The architecture performed consistently across sample sizes, outcome families, lag horizons, and jointly fitted multi-exposure settings, retaining recovery performance as exposures were added; fit-specific changes were largely confined to optimization, and applications recovered established empirical patterns.

Versions

Related

  1. Distributed Performance Boosting through Neural Control for Plug-and-Play Networks
    Danilo Saccani, Leonardo Massai, Giancarlo Ferrari-Trecate
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textOptimisation & controlarXiv
  2. Unknotting number is not additive under connected sum
    Mark Brittenham, Susan Hermiller
    Annals of MathematicsPeer-reviewedLicence not statedFull text15 citedGeometry & topologyOpenAlex
  3. Hilbert’s tenth problem via additive combinatorics
    Peter Koymans, Carlo Pagano
    Journal of the American Mathematical SocietyPeer-reviewedLicence not statedFull text26 citedGeometry & topologyOpenAlex
  4. Classification of skew left braces with additive group isomorphic to the infinite dihedral group
    Akihide Hanaki, Yuto Sakata, Hiroki Yoshino
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textAlgebra & number theoryarXiv
  5. Minimal Alt(6)-modules with additive dimension on characteristic non 3
    German Mata Gutiez
    arXivPreprintCC BY-NC-ND 4.0Full textAlgebra & number theoryarXiv
BibTeX
@misc{helmersson2026distributed,
  title = {{Distributed Lag Neural Additive Models}},
  author = {Calle Helmersson and Shivang Pandey and Leonardo Olivetti and Elena Raffetti},
  howpublished = {arXiv},
  year = {2026},
  month = sep,
  doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2609.07381},
  eprint = {2609.07381},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.07381},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - Distributed Lag Neural Additive Models
AU  - Calle Helmersson
AU  - Shivang Pandey
AU  - Leonardo Olivetti
AU  - Elena Raffetti
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/09/07
PB  - arXiv
DO  - 10.48550/arxiv.2609.07381
UR  - https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.07381
AB  - We introduce Distributed Lag Neural Additive Models (DLNAMs), neural-additive analogues of Distributed Lag Non-linear Models (DLNMs) for learning nonlinear effects distributed over lags. DLNAMs replace a prespecified spline cross-basis with neural components that learn exposure--lag response surfaces, avoiding choices of basis family, dimension, and knot placement while preserving additive interpretability and familiar distributed-lag summaries. Exp-centered input layers, smooth activations, and learned subnetwork mixtures produce smooth, locally adaptive representations; pointwise uncertainty combines a conditional last-layer Laplace approximation with between-member ensemble variation. In simulations, DLNAMs generally outperformed DLNM comparators, including penalized and treed variants, in recovering known response functions, with lower bias, stronger boundary recovery, and better-calibrated cumulative intervals; gains were largest for more demanding functions. The architecture performed consistently across sample sizes, outcome families, lag horizons, and jointly fitted multi-exposure settings, retaining recovery performance as exposures were added; fit-specific changes were largely confined to optimization, and applications recovered established empirical patterns.
ER  -