Pretrained time-series foundation models can improve university enrolment forecasts even with sparse, disrupted data when fed leakage-safe covariates, but accuracy gains hinge on cohort characteristics and careful covariate design.

Main Finding

Covariate-conditioned, zero-shot Time Series Foundation Models (TSFMs) can be practically competitive with classical operational baselines for annual commencing-enrolment forecasting in severely data-sparse institutional settings — provided covariates are engineered and vintage-controlled using a leakage-safe protocol. However, the operational gains are conditional: they vary by cohort (domestic vs international), covariate design, and model–covariate compatibility. The paper provides an auditable, transferable decision-time workflow for when and how to deploy context-aware zero-shot TSFMs under structural instability.

Key Points

• Problem setting: annual commencing-enrolment forecasts for a university (domestic and international cohorts) under severe data sparsity, short histories, and frequent structural breaks. Accurate forecasts are operationally critical for capacity and resource allocation.
• Modelling approach: use zero-shot TSFMs (pre-trained, no institutional fine-tuning) to leverage broad priors while conditioning on external covariates available at decision time.
• Leakage-safe covariates: rigorous vintage control and decision-time construction to avoid look-ahead bias. Two classes of exogenous signals were used:
  • Google Trends RSV (institution name query), aggregated from monthly to annual and stabilized via EWMA (2- and 3-year spans) and lag-1 level.
  • Institutional Operating Conditions Index (IOCI): an annual 0–100 regime covariate constructed from year-stamped narrative evidence using a fixed LLM prompt + rubric; vintage constraints and a conservative calibration to GPT-5.4 output were applied.
• Evaluation protocol: an expanding-window backtest reflecting real decision-time practice (strict forecast origin discipline). TSFMs were compared to interpretable operational baselines (persistence/naïve and other classical methods).
• Results summary: covariate-conditioned TSFMs are competitive and can improve accuracy without bespoke institutional training, but improvement is not universal. Performance gains depend on:
  • Cohort characteristics (some cohorts benefit more from covariates).
  • Stability and design of covariates (engineered summaries, vintage alignment matter).
  • Model architecture and how it ingests dynamic covariates.
• Practical emphasis: auditability, reproducibility, and a documented covariate construction protocol are central to safe operational deployment.

Data & Methods

• Data
  • Target: annual commencing-student headcounts (domestic and international) from a public university, 2007–2025 (19 observations per cohort).
  • Minimal pre-processing: harmonised cohort definitions and small reconciliation tolerances to preserve measurement scale.
• Covariate engineering
  • Google Trends RSV (institution-name query), worldwide; monthly → annual aggregation; standardized within each training window.
  • Summary features: EWMA with span 2 (α2 = 2/3) and span 3 (α3 = 1/2), plus lag-1 level. These stabilize high-frequency noise and retain recency.
  • IOCI: LLM-based scoring of year-indexed narrative evidence into a 0–100 operating-pressure measure. Process enforced vintage constraints, explicit prompt and rubric, year-specific scoring, rationales, and a calibration step using GPT-5.4 outputs (conservative ±1 adjustment).
• Models and evaluation
  • Zero-shot TSFMs (pre-trained models such as Moirai / TimesFM / Chronos-Bolt family described in background) used without weight updates. Dynamic covariates provided only up to forecast origin (no future leakage); scenario analysis possible if future covariate paths are explicitly supplied.
  • Baselines include persistence (naïve) and other interpretable operational references to quantify incremental value.
  • Expanding-window backtest replicates operational decision timelines and enforces leakage-safe preprocessing. Evaluation considered not only point accuracy but also calibration, auditability, and practical decision utility.
• Reproducibility & auditability
  • The paper documents prompt schemas, scoring rubrics, vintage controls, and feature-engineering rules to enable repeatable covariate construction.

Implications for AI Economics

• Practical deployment of TSFMs in low-data institutional economics:
  • TSFMs offer a strong zero-shot prior useful when institution-specific training data are too scarce or sensitive to permit fine-tuning.
  • Conditioning TSFMs on properly engineered, vintage-controlled covariates can materially improve forecasts for operational economic decision-making in universities.
• Role of LLMs as structured data generators:
  • LLMs can reliably convert unstructured institutional narratives into quantitative regime indices (IOCI), providing economically meaningful signals where numerical data are sparse. This expands the toolkit for economic measurement in micro-institutions and local contexts.
  • However, stability, calibration, and transparent prompts/rubrics are essential to ensure credibility and auditability.
• Cost–benefit and operational considerations:
  • Institutions can get forecasting gains without the expense of bespoke model training, but they must invest in disciplined covariate engineering, vintage control, and process documentation.
  • The marginal value of added complexity (covariates + TSFM) depends on cohort heterogeneity and covariate signal-to-noise; simple baselines (persistence) can remain competitive in many cases, especially near regime shifts.
• Research and policy directions:
  • Encourage more benchmarks of zero-shot TSFMs in other low-sample economic settings (small regions, niche industries, other institutional forecasts).
  • Develop standard vintage-controlled pipelines for public web signals and text-derived indices to be shared across institutions (improves transferability and reduces duplicated effort).
  • Investigate probabilistic calibration and robustness diagnostics for TSFMs with LLM-derived covariates to quantify uncertainty in resource-allocation decisions.
• Risks and cautions:
  • Single-institution, two-series study: external validity should be tested across multiple institutions and contexts.
  • Dependence on LLMs introduces model-origin and stability risks (LLM updates, prompt sensitivity). Conservative calibration and versioning of prompts/LLMs are required for reliable economic decision support.
  • Structural breaks and policy changes remain hard; external covariates help but are not a panacea—scenario analysis and expert judgment should remain integral.

Actionable takeaways for institutional planners and economists: - When data are sparse, consider zero-shot TSFMs as a practical forecasting option if you (a) enforce strict vintage control, (b) engineer stable covariates (EWMA, lags), and (c) document LLM prompt/rubric procedures for any narrative-derived indices. - Always benchmark against simple baselines (persistence) and evaluate cohort-specific performance before operational adoption. - Treat LLM-derived indices as assistive measurements that must be versioned, audited, and calibrated before informing high-stakes allocation decisions.