Skip to content

MissPath-FM: Flow Matching with Structured Priors for Partially Observed Time Series

Oct 2026 · 0 citations · 32 references
Computer Science

Abstract

Flow matching has emerged as a powerful alternative to diffusion models for generative modeling, but standard conditional flow matching is fundamentally misaligned with partially observed time series: starting from an uninformed Gaussian source forces the model to transport even already-observed entries from noise to the target, wasting capacity on trivially known regions. We propose MissPath-FM, a partial-observation-aware flow matching framework that redesigns the source prior and probability path for incomplete time series. MissPath-FM employs structured source priors (interpolation priors and Gaussian process posterior priors) to initialize the flow close to the observed signal, paired with a missingness-aware smooth path that allocates transport asymmetrically between observed and missing regions. We evaluate systematically across four datasets, four missingness mechanisms (MCAR, block, MNAR, irregular), two missing ratios, and three sequence lengths (T in {24, 48, 96}), totaling 48 settings against eight baselines. MissPath-FM wins 29 of 32 settings at T=48 and 45 of 48 overall (93.8%). Our ablations reveal a regime-dependent design hierarchy in which no single component suffices: under random missingness the source prior yields a large initial gain, but under structured block missingness it can fail entirely and the learned flow becomes indispensable; the missingness-aware path contributes a further 12%-26% across all regimes. Mechanistically, structured priors shorten observed-region transport by up to 15x, concentrating the velocity field on genuinely uncertain entries. Project page: https://zgp110.github.io/misspath-fm/

View source

Similar papers

#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54

Diffusion models as plug-and-play priors

The possibility of inferring high-dimensional data inference in a model that consists of a prior and an auxiliary differentiable constraint given some additional information is considered, thereby allowing a range of potential applications in adapting models to new domains and tasks.

Alexandros Graikos, Esmeralda S. Whitammer, N. Jojic et al. · 316 citations · ⚡15

Trajectory Balance: Improved Credit Assignment in GFlowNets

It is proved that any global minimizer of the trajectory balance objective can define a policy that samples exactly from the target distribution, and empirically demonstrate the benefits of the trajectories balance objective for GFlowNet convergence, diversity of generated samples, and robustness to long action sequenc...

Esmeralda S. Whitammer, Moksh Jain, Emmanuel Bengio et al. · 302 citations · ⚡60

KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimization

This work proposes a HALO that directly maximizes the utility of generations instead of maximizing the log-likelihood of preferences, and suggests that the best loss depends on the inductive biases most appropriate for a given setting, an oft-overlooked consideration.

Kawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff et al. · 195 citations · ⚡28
#machine learning Review Open access Jun 2014

Why Early-Stage Software Startups Fail: A Behavioral Framework

This state-of-practice investigation was performed using a literature review followed by a multiple-case study approach and presents how inconsistency between managerial strategies and execution can lead to failure by means of a behavioral framework.

Carmine Giardino, Xiaofeng Wang, P. Abrahamsson · 175 citations · ⚡19

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Oct 23, 2026

Q&A: How AI came to model the “messy” human mind

Assistant Professor Benjamin Lindquist studies how engineers deliberately injected randomness into early AI, giving rise to deep-learning models that sometimes hallucinate.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.