SenTSR-Bench: Thinking with Injected Knowledge for Time-Series Reasoning
Organizations: The Pennsylvania State University · AWS AI Labs · Amazon RME
Abstract
Time-series diagnostic reasoning is essential for many applications, yet existing solutions face a persistent gap: general reasoning large language models (GRLMs) possess strong reasoning skills but lack the domain-specific knowledge to understand complex time-series patterns. Conversely, fine-tuned time-series LLMs (TSLMs) understand these patterns but lack the capacity to generalize reasoning for more complicated questions. To bridge this gap, we propose a hybrid knowledge-injection framework that injects TSLM-generated insights directly into GRLM's reasoning trace, thereby achieving strong time-series reasoning with in-domain knowledge. As collecting data for knowledge injection fine-tuning is costly, we further leverage a reinforcement learning-based approach with verifiable rewards (RLVR) to elicit knowledge-rich traces without human supervision, then transfer such an in-domain thinking trace into GRLM for efficient knowledge injection. We further release SenTSR-Bench, a multivariate time-series-based diagnostic reasoning benchmark collected from real-world industrial operations. Across SenTSR-Bench and other public datasets, our method consistently surpasses TSLMs by 9.1%-26.1% and GRLMs by 7.9%-22.4%, delivering robust, context-aware time-series diagnostic insights.
Figures & tables
| Benchmark | New Time-Series? | Real- World? | Multi-stage Advancing Questions? | Anno- tation? |
| TSEvol ( Xie et al., 2024 ) | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | LLM |
| TS&Language ( Merrill et al., 2024 ) | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | LLM |
| MTBench ( Chen et al., 2025b ) | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | LLM |
| Sensor-TSR (Ours) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Human |
| Model | Paradigm | What Happened | How Happened | Suggested Fix | Overall | Improvement vs. | |
| TSLM | GRLM | ||||||
| TSLM (Qwen-VL-3B) | SFT | 0.530 0.037 | 0.567 0.029 | 0.548 0.011 | 0.549 0.019 | — | — |
| RL | 0.512 0.038 | 0.594 0.019 | 0.546 0.009 | 0.551 0.014 | — | — | |
| GRLM (Claude3.7-Text) | Zero-shot | 0.712 0.019 | 0.409 0.033 | 0.473 0.024 | 0.531 0.011 | — | — |
| Few-shot | 0.691 0.009 | 0.561 0.011 | 0.509 0.009 | 0.587 0.006 | — | +10.5% | |
| TSLM + GRLM | SFT-Injection | 0.742 0.023 | 0.603 0.021 | 0.558 0.019 | 0.634 0.006 | +15.5% | +19.4% |
| Model | Paradigm | Causal | Deductive | Inductive | MCQ2 | Overall | Improvement vs. | |
| TSLM | GRLM | |||||||
| TSLM (Qwen-VL-3B) | SFT | 0.623 0.006 | 0.520 0.013 | 0.357 0.010 | 0.507 0.032 | 0.502 0.005 | — | — |
| RL | 0.627 0.016 | 0.496 0.014 | 0.313 0.023 | 0.597 0.031 | 0.508 0.006 | — | — | |
| GRLM (Qwen3-32B) | Zero-shot | 0.507 0.041 | 0.473 0.035 | 0.623 0.036 | 0.407 0.015 | 0.502 0.023 | — | — |
| Few-shot | 0.622 0.028 | 0.473 0.035 | 0.460 0.033 | 0.427 0.015 | 0.495 0.010 | — | -1.4% | |
| TSLM+GRLM | SFT-Injection | 0.569 0.035 | 0.543 0.013 | 0.592 0.031 | 0.410 0.036 | 0.528 0.008 | +5.2% | +5.2% |
| Model | Injection Strategy | Inductive | Deductive | Causal | MCQ2 | Overall |
| TSLM (ChatTS-14B) | — | 0.812 0.007 | 0.597 0.013 | 0.732 0.006 | 0.590 0.026 | 0.683 0.010 |
| GRLM (Claude3.7-Text) | — | 0.763 0.021 | 0.612 0.029 | 0.645 0.021 | 0.640 0.014 | 0.665 0.010 |
| TSLM + GRLM | Intermediate | 0.805 0.026 | 0.659 0.022 | 0.645 0.010 | 0.703 0.037 | 0.703 0.006 |
| Late | 0.791 0.014 | 0.667 0.011 | 0.703 0.019 | 0.680 0.022 | 0.710 0.003 | |
| Early | 0.824 0.019 | 0.643 0.011 | 0.703 0.019 | 0.690 0.016 | 0.715 0.003 | |
| TSLM (ChatTS-14B) | — | 0.812 0.007 | 0.597 0.013 | 0.732 0.006 | 0.590 0.026 | 0.683 0.010 |
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Time Series Reasoning
Time series reasoning studies how models interpret temporal patterns, answer questions about sequences, and use evidence to make forecasts.
See all 44 papers