Self-supervised foundation models have achieved remarkable success across domains, including time series. However, the potential of non-contrastive methods, a paradigm that has driven significant advances in computer vision, remains underexplored for time series. In this work, we adapt DINOv2-style self-distillation to pretrain a time series foundation model, building on the Mantis tokenizer and transformer encoder architecture as our backbone. Through a student-teacher framework, our method Utica learns representations that capture both temporal invariance via augmented crops and fine-grained local structure via patch masking. Our approach achieves state-of-the-art classification performance on both UCR and UEA benchmarks. These results suggest that non-contrastive methods are a promising and complementary pretraining strategy for time series foundation models.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Example of a time series sample generation via causal DAG.
Figure 2: Architecture.
Figure 3: U nlabeled Ti me-series C rop A ugmented framework. The self-supervised objective aims to match the features produced by the teacher with those produced by the student. Full details about pretraining can be found in Appendix B .
Figure 4: Average accuracy comparison across linear probing and fine-tuning on both UCR and UEA benchmarks. Number of wins shown in parentheses.
Loss Type
data2vec
iBOT+KoLeo
DINO+KoLeo
UTICA
Accuracy
0.7802
0.735
0.747
0.794
Table 1: Ablation on the loss type used for pretraining.
Appendix figures & tables10 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 5: Example of synthetic time series from the DAG-based generator.
Parameter
Value
Depth (number of layers)
6
Attention heads
8
Key/query/value dimension per head
128
MLP hidden dimension
512
Hidden dimension d
256
Dropout
0.1
Appendix
Table 2: Transformer hyper-parameters of the Transformer Encoder Unit.
Parameter
Value
Input dimension
256
Hidden dimension
2 048
Bottleneck dimension
256
Output dimension (prototypes) K
65 536
Number of MLP layers
3
Activation
GELU
Appendix
Table 3: Projection head hyper-parameters (shared by DINO and iBOT heads).
Figure 8: Four local views before and after eventual jittering.
Figure 9: Masked patches example
Parameter
Value
Optimiser
AdamW
(β1,β2)
(0.9,0.999)
Base learning rate
1×10−3
Minimum learning rate
1×10−7
Learning rate schedule
Cosine decay
Warmup epochs
0.7
Appendix
Table 4: Optimisation hyper-parameters.
Dataset
NuTime
Moment
Mantis
Utica
ArticularyWordRecognition
0.9933 ±0.0000
0.9800 ±0.0000
0.9930 ±0.0030
0.9900 ±0.0027
BasicMotions
1.0000 ±0.0000
0.9920 ±0.0140
1.0000 ±0.0000
1.0000 ±0.0000
CharacterTrajectories
0.9649 ±0.0038
0.9700 ±0.0020
0.9400 ±0.0010
0.9847 ±0.0006
Cricket
0.9907 ±0.0080
0.9770 ±0.0080
1.0000 ±0.0000
0.9907 ±0.0066
ERing
0.9716 ±0.0057
0.9690 ±0.0080
0.9410 ±0.0100
0.9605 ±0.0017
Eigenworms
0.7786 ±0.0202
0.7350 ±0.0160
0.7530 ±0.0160
0.7837 ±0.0190
Appendix
Table 5: Comparison under linear probing regime on UEA. The best epoch performance is averaged over 3 random seeds and reported with the standard deviation. Bold indicates the best result per row. NuTime, Moment and Mantis results are from [ Feofanov et al., 2025 ] . We exclude datasets whose memory requirements exceed our available GPU memory (24 GB).
Dataset
GPT4TS
NuTime
Moment
Mantis
Utica
ArticularyWordRecognition
0.9633±0.0058
0.9833±0.0033
0.9733±0.0033
0.9944 ±0.0019
0.9900±0.0033
BasicMotions
0.8833±0.0144
1.0000 ±0.0000
1.0000 ±0.0000
1.0000 ±0.0000
1.0000 ±0.0000
CharacterTrajectories
0.9731±0.0056
0.9800±0.0036
0.9791±0.0028
0.9893±0.0008
0.9937 ±0.0007
Cricket
0.9213±0.0080
0.9907±0.0080
0.9491±0.0160
0.9954±0.0080
1.0000 ±0.0000
ERing
0.9074±0.0098
0.9506±0.0077
0.9358±0.0077
0.9827±0.0043
0.9864 ±0.0021
Epilepsy
0.8092±0.0233
0.9952±0.0042
0.9976±0.0042
1.0000 ±0.0000
0.9952±0.0042
Appendix
Table 6: Comparison under the fine tuning regime on UEA. The best epoch performance is averaged over 3 random seeds and reported with the standard deviation. Bold indicates the best result per row. GPT4S, NuTime, Moment and Mantis results are from [ Feofanov et al., 2025 ] . We exclude datasets whose memory requirements exceed our available GPU memory (24 GB).
Dataset
NuTime
Moment
Mantis
Utica
ACSF1
0.7367 ±0.0351
0.75 ±0.0173
0.6133 ±0.0208
0.6200 ±0.0000
Adiac
0.7255 ±0.0115
0.7886 ±0.0074
0.7332 ±0.0039
0.5090 ±0.0142
AllGestureWiimoteX
0.661 ±0.003
0.6105 ±0.0136
0.6705 ±0.0044
0.6824 ±0.0068
AllGestureWiimoteY
0.6362 ±0.0079
0.6576 ±0.0079
0.6671 ±0.0057
0.7029 ±0.0071
AllGestureWiimoteZ
0.6024 ±0.0179
0.5767 ±0.0103
0.6695 ±0.0033
0.6448 ±0.0016
ArrowHead
0.76 ±0.0198
0.8076 ±0.0144
0.7105 ±0.0175
0.6514 ±0.0618
Appendix
Table 7: Comparison under linear probing regime on UCR. The best epoch performance is averaged over 3 random seeds and reported with the standard deviation. Bold indicates the best result per row. NuTime, Moment and Mantis results are from [ Feofanov et al., 2025 ] .
Dataset
GPT4TS
NuTime
Moment
Mantis
Utica
ACSF1
0.4900 ±0.0265
0.6733 ±0.0321
0.6033 ±0.0379
0.7433 ±0.0115
0.6733 ±0.0419
Adiac
0.3572 ±0.0059
0.7349 ±0.0141
0.5823 ±0.0296
0.7766 ±0.0030
0.8159 ±0.0130
AllGestureWiimoteX
0.4895 ±0.0105
0.6386 ±0.0038
0.7000 ±0.0103
0.7619 ±0.0050
0.7395 ±0.0115
AllGestureWiimoteY
0.5062 ±0.0116
0.7152 ±0.0103
0.7081 ±0.0343
0.7948 ±0.0097
0.7390 ±0.0106
AllGestureWiimoteZ
0.4719 ±0.0119
0.6419 ±0.0058
0.6976 ±0.0218
0.7300 ±0.0100
0.6967 ±0.0141
ArrowHead
0.7638 ±0.0033
0.8305 ±0.0033
0.7790 ±0.0682
0.8210 ±0.0389
0.8457 ±0.0123
Appendix
Table 8: Comparison under the fine tuning regime on UCR. The best epoch performance is averaged over 3 random seeds and reported with the standard deviation. Bold indicates the best result per row. GPT4S, NuTime, Moment and Mantis results are from [ Feofanov et al., 2025 ] .
Self-supervised time series representation learning uses unlabeled sequences to learn features that transfer to forecasting, classification, and anomaly detection.
While foundation models have revolutionized various domains, their application to time series classification remains rather under-explored, with existing literature predominantly focused on forecasting. To bridge this gap, we introduce Mantis, a transformer-based foundation model pre-trained exclusively on synthetic data via self-supervised contrastive learning. We demonstrate that effective tokenization is critical to unlocking the full potential of transformers, proposing a novel token generator unit. Furthermore, we introduce an enhanced test-time methodology that bridges the performance gap between Mantis and strong specialized approaches by leveraging intermediate-layer representations, self-ensembling, and cross-model embedding fusion. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Mantis establishes a new state-of-the-art, outperforming existing foundation models across four diverse dataset collections covering various application domains.
Vasilii Feofanov, Songkang Wen, Shifeng Xie +10
1. Huawei Noah’s Ark Lab · 3. Paris Cit´e University · 4. Helmholtz Munich +3
TS2Vec is one of the strongest self-supervised methods for time series classification, introduced in 2022. It is designed to be trained anew on every dataset: self-supervised pre-training followed by linear probing. Since then, the field has shifted towards foundation models that reuse one encoder across datasets. Yet TS2Vec offers a compact convolutional architecture that operates directly on temporal samples and accepts variable-length inputs without resampling. We ask whether these properties can be retained when the encoder is pre-trained only once, and show that they can: TS2Vec can essentially be turned into a foundation model. Three changes suffice: pre-train on a synthetic corpus, feed the encoder a raw amplitude view and an instance-normalized shape view of the input through two small stems, and distill one specialist encoder per view into a single encoder. The result, TS2Vec-FM, is a 1.6M-parameter dilated convolutional network that, kept frozen, reaches 83.3% on UCR-128 and 75.3% on UEA-27 under linear probing, within 0.3 pp of MantisV2, the current state of the art, and above TS2Vec trained separately on each target dataset. What we find most interesting is how different TS2Vec-FM is from other foundation models in design: near-parity is reached without attention, without a patch tokenizer, and without intermediate-layer extraction, using an "old-school" convolutional encoder and a two-layer MLP stem.
Vasilii Feofanov, Zhenghan Tai, Andrei Ermakov +1
NL · University of Toronto · Université de Montréal Mila - Quebec AI Institute
Self-supervised pre-training of time series models is currently dominated by next-token prediction and reconstruction objectives. In continuous-valued domains, these paradigms often waste model capacity on high-frequency, point-wise noise at the expense of learning invariant structure. While invariance-based self-distillation has proven highly effective in computer vision, its application to temporal data remains largely underexplored. Effectively adapting such methods to time series requires carefully designed augmentations: spatial operations like cropping can shift the timing of repeating cycles or distort the signal, while basic jittering may provide limited variation. We introduce Wavelet-based self-distillation for time series (WinoTS), an invariance-based pre-training paradigm designed specifically for temporal signals. At its core, WinoTS leverages time-frequency augmentations to construct multi-scale structural views without distorting underlying signal dynamics. Across extensive evaluations, WinoTS outperforms state-of-the-art baselines in long-term forecasting, cross-domain zero-shot transfer, and unsupervised anomaly detection. Notably, linear probing on frozen WinoTS representations frequently surpasses fully supervised models trained from scratch. Systematic ablations demonstrate that WinoTS is a flexible, architecture-agnostic framework yielding gains across time series backbones, and establish that time-frequency transformations provide a principled alternative to vision-style spatial augmentations.