Modern approaches for learning from non-Markovian time series, such as recurrent neural networks, neural controlled differential equations or transformers, typically rely on implicit memory mechanisms that can be difficult to interpret or to train over long horizons. We propose the Volterra signatureVSig(x;K) as a principled, explicit feature representation for history-dependent systems. By developing the input path x weighted by a temporal kernel K into the tensor algebra, we leverage the associated Volterra--Chen identity to derive rigorous learning-theoretic guarantees. Specifically, we prove an injectivity statement (identifiability under augmentation) that leads to a universal approximation theorem on the infinite dimensional path space, which in certain cases is achieved by linear functionals of VSig(x;K). Moreover, we demonstrate applicability of the kernel trick by showing that the inner product associated with Volterra signatures admits a closed characterization via a two-parameter integral equation, enabling numerical methods from PDEs for computation. For a large class of exponential-type kernels, VSig(x;K) solves a linear state-space ODE in the tensor algebra. Combined with inherent invariance to time reparameterization, these results position the Volterra signature as a robust, computationally tractable feature map for data science. We demonstrate its efficacy in dynamic learning tasks on real and synthetic data, where it consistently improves classical path signature baselines.
Figures & tables
Figure 4.1 . Volterra signature vs. classical signature expansions, compared with the fractional SDE solution ( 4.1 ) for one testing sample. The models were trained with M=900 training samples and N=500 time-steps on [0,1] Parameters: Y0=1,b0=0,b1=−1,σ0=1,σ1=0.5 , signature truncation L=6 .
Method
MSE∣[0,1]
R2∣[0,1]
MSE∣[0,2]
R2∣[0,2]
Sig
2.29×10−4
1.000
2.9387
-0.923
VSigk
6.30×10−5
1.000
0.0012
0.999
VSigkλ
1.38×10−4
1.000
0.0124
0.992
Table 1. Prediction performance of the three feature maps Sig , VSigk , and VSigkλ , evaluated on the intervals [0,1] and [0,2] . We report the mean squared error (MSE) and the coefficient of determination R2 .
Figure 4.2 . Next-day forecast of realized S&P 500 volatility using our method VSig , compared with the benchmark HAR , on the test set. The lower subplot shows the absolute forecast errors ∣y−y∣ for both methods, where y denotes the realized volatility.
Figure 4.3 . Left: Coefficient of determination R2 as a (linearly interpolated) function of the past-window size p (days), reported on the training and test sets for the methods VSig and Sig , and the (constant) benchmark HAR . Right: Scatter plots of realized volatility y versus predictions y for our method VSig and the HAR benchmark.
20
60
110
150
200
240
q
1
0.59/ 0.60 /0.60
0.58/ 0.62 /0.60
0.57/ 0.63 /0.60
0.56/ 0.64 /0.60
0.52/ 0.65 /0.60
0.47/ 0.65 /0.60
3
0.34/0.33/0.38
0.38/ 0.38 /0.38
0.38/ 0.39 /0.38
0.39/ 0.40 /0.38
0.36/ 0.40 /0.38
0.35/ 0.42 /0.38
5
0.22 /0.21/0.25
0.27 /0.24/0.25
0.29 /0.25/0.25
0.31 /0.25/0.25
0.28 /0.26/0.25
0.27/ 0.28 /0.25
Table 2. R2 overview on the test set: ( Sig / VSig / HAR ) for forecasting horizons q∈{1,3,5} and several past-window sizes p .
Datasets/Kernels
Linear
RBF
GAK
Sig
VSig
Sig-RBF
VSig-RBF
ArticularyWordRecognition
98.0
98.0
98.0
92.3
98.7
98.3
99.0
BasicMotions
87.5
97.5
97.5
97.5
97.5
100.0
97.5
Cricket
91.7
91.7
97.2
86.1
90.3
97.2
97.2
Libras
73.9
77.2
79.0
81.7
87.8
81.7
86.7
NATOPS
90.0
92.2
90.6
88.3
93.9
93.3
92.2
RacketSports
76.9
78.3
84.2
80.2
73.0
84.9
90.8
Table 3. Classification accuracies (%) on UCR/UEA datasets. The best test accuracy in each row is highlighted in bold.