OpenRepro

← Back to the paper page

Replication record · arXiv:1910.13051

ROCKET: exceptionally fast and accurate time series classification using random convolutional kernels

Partially reproduced

Using the authors code (angus924/rocket) and the UCR datasets from timeseriesclassification.com, ROCKET accuracy on the 85 bake-off datasets reproduced closely: mean accuracy 0.8509 against 0.8510 reported, mean absolute per-dataset difference 0.21 percentage points, and no dataset off by more than 2 points. With the reproduced accuracies, ROCKET ties TS-CHIEF for the best mean rank (both exactly 288/85) instead of ranking first outright, so the pre-registered best-mean-rank check is not met; the paper notes that the differences among the top methods are not statistically significant. Total compute time over the 85 datasets was 111 minutes, within the stated 1 hour 50 minutes plus hardware allowance, although timings here are inflated by concurrency and a low-memory workaround. The ElectricDevices training-time claim could not be measured under comparable conditions.

Plan. Registered before results were recorded; not sealed (legacy).

Qualifiers. Some claims were registered after command output had already been observed. The plan was never sealed (legacy attempt): claims were frozen only by their first result. At least one result was matched by the legacy rule rather than bound to an excerpt. At least one scored value was read from an excerpt the agent chose after seeing the output, not by a rule fixed before it.

Scored (headline)
2 of 3 consistent
Other checks
2 of 2 consistent, 1 not tested
Deviations
3 (0 material)
Integrity flags
0
Logged compute
0.40 h over 37 commands and 0 jobs
Work tree when the attempt ended
angus924/rocket@36bd908b4f38 in /work/rocket

Claims

Averaged over the 85 bake-off datasets, ROCKET (10,000 kernels, ridge classifier) attains the per-dataset test accuracies reported in Table 1, whose mean is 0.8510.headline

Consistent
Paper 0.851002 accuracyObserved 0.850932 accuracyAccepted if within ±0.005
Table 1: Classification Accuracy, ‘Bake Off’ Datasets

Table 1, pp. 25-26 (mean of the Rocket column, computed at event 16) · quote verified on p. 25 · equivalence check · observed/published 0.9999 · registered at event 18, before the first recorded result (after command output had been observed)

Method, tolerance rationale and evidence

Metric. Mean over 85 datasets of test accuracy (each dataset: mean of 10 runs, original train/test split)

Why this tolerance. Table 1 values are means of 10 runs with different random kernels; per-dataset run-to-run spread of about 0.5-1 percentage point averages down to well under 0.1 pp across 85 datasets, so the 0.5 pp band mainly allows for library-version and dataset-version drift.

Event 89. Observed 0.850932, delta -7e-05, consistent. Evidence events [86] (value matched by the legacy rule; not bound to an excerpt). Mean over the 85 bake-off datasets of the 10-run mean test accuracy (10,000 kernels, original train/test splits), merged from all job outputs by analysis/summarize.py; 66 datasets ran with the authors unmodified script and 19 with the low-memory driver verified bit-identical at event 79. Per dataset: 39 higher, 9 equal, 37 lower than Table 1.

ROCKET has the best (lowest) mean rank of the eight classifiers compared on the 85 bake-off datasets.headline

Inconsistent
Paper 1 positionObserved 1.5 positionAccepted if at most 1
obtaining the best mean rank over the 85 ‘bake off’ datasets

Section 4, p. 11; Figure 1, p. 1 · quote verified on p. 11 · bound check · observed/published 1.5 · registered at event 19, before the first recorded result (after command output had been observed)

Method, tolerance rationale and evidence

Metric. Rank position of ROCKET by mean rank among the 8 classifiers in Table 1, with reproduced ROCKET accuracies substituted for the Rocket column and the other 7 columns taken from Table 1

Why this tolerance. Binary claim: ROCKET must still rank first. Note the margin in Table 1 is small (mean rank 3.3588 vs 3.4176 for TS-CHIEF), which the paper itself says is not statistically significant, so this check is sensitive to small accuracy differences.

Event 90. Observed 1.5, delta +0.5, inconsistent. Evidence events [88] (value matched by the legacy rule; not bound to an excerpt). Mean ranks over the 85 datasets recomputed in exact rational arithmetic with reproduced ROCKET accuracies and the other seven columns of Table 1; ROCKET and TS-CHIEF tie at exactly 288/85, so with ties averaged (the convention used for per-dataset ranks) ROCKET holds rank position 1.5. With the paper values, the same code gives ROCKET 571/170 and TS-CHIEF 581/170, position 1. The summary at event 86 listed ROCKET first only because ties were ordered by column.

Per-dataset ROCKET accuracies in Table 1 are reproducible: the mean absolute difference between reproduced and reported accuracy across the 85 datasets is small.

Consistent
Paper 0 accuracyObserved 0.002117 accuracyAccepted if at most 0.01
The results presented for Rocket are mean results over 10 runs (using a different set of random kernels for each run).

Section 4.1.1, p. 11; Table 1 · quote verified on p. 11 · bound, broad check · registered at event 20, before the first recorded result (after command output had been observed)

Method, tolerance rationale and evidence

Metric. Mean over 85 datasets of |reproduced accuracy - Table 1 accuracy|

Why this tolerance. With 10-run means, sampling noise alone gives per-dataset differences of roughly 0.2-0.5 pp on typical datasets and more on small test sets; a mean absolute difference up to 1 pp is treated as agreement.

Event 91. Observed 0.002117, delta +0.002117, consistent. Evidence events [86] (value matched by the legacy rule; not bound to an excerpt). Mean over 85 datasets of |reproduced 10-run mean accuracy - Table 1 accuracy|. No dataset differs by more than 0.02.

Total compute time (training and test, single CPU core per dataset) for ROCKET over all 85 bake-off datasets is 1 hour 50 minutes.headline

Consistent
Paper 110 minutesObserved 111.18 minutesAccepted if at most 165
The total compute time (training and test) for Rocket on all 85 ‘bake off’ datasets is 1 hour 50 minutes

Section 1, p. 2 · quote verified on p. 2 · bound check · observed/published 1.011 · registered at event 21, before the first recorded result (after command output had been observed)

Method, tolerance rationale and evidence

Metric. Sum over 85 datasets of the authors script time_training_seconds + time_test_seconds (per-run means, transform included, data loading excluded), in minutes

Why this tolerance. Hardware differs (paper: Xeon E5-2680 v3 / Gold 6150 cluster cores; here: Apple silicon cores via Docker, with several datasets running concurrently). The claim is an order-of-magnitude speed claim, so it is judged as an upper bound with 50% headroom for hardware.

Event 92. Observed 111.18, delta +1.18, consistent. Evidence events [86] (value matched by the legacy rule; not bound to an excerpt). Sum over 85 datasets of per-run mean training + test seconds (transform included), from the authors script timers or the identical timers in the low-memory driver, divided by 60. Conservative for an upper-bound claim: 86.26 of the 111.18 minutes come from 19 datasets run with disk-backed arrays under memory pressure, and up to five processes ran concurrently; both inflate time. The 66 datasets run with the unmodified script took 24.93 minutes.

Training ROCKET on ElectricDevices (8,926 training examples) takes about 6 minutes on a single core.

Not tested
Paper 6 minutesObserved —Not tested: compute/memory limit (note, event 94)Accepted if at most 9
6 minutes for the ‘bake off’ dataset with the largest training set

Section 1, p. 2 · quote verified on p. 2 · bound check · registered at event 22, before the first recorded result (after command output had been observed)

Method, tolerance rationale and evidence

Metric. time_training_seconds for ElectricDevices from the authors script (transform + ridge fit, mean per run), in minutes

Why this tolerance. Same hardware caveat as the total-time claim; upper bound with 50% headroom.

Training ROCKET on HandOutlines (series length 2,709) takes 4 minutes 52 seconds on a single core.

Consistent
Paper 4.8667 minutesObserved 4.03 minutesAccepted if at most 7.3
4 minutes and 52 seconds for the ‘bake off’ dataset with the longest time series

Section 1, p. 2 · quote verified on p. 2 · bound check · observed/published 0.8281 · registered at event 23, before the first recorded result (after command output had been observed)

Method, tolerance rationale and evidence

Metric. time_training_seconds for HandOutlines from the authors script (transform + ridge fit, mean per run), in minutes

Why this tolerance. Same hardware caveat as the total-time claim; upper bound with 50% headroom.

Event 93. Observed 4.03, delta -0.8367, consistent. Evidence events [86] (value matched by the legacy rule; not bound to an excerpt). time_training_seconds for HandOutlines from the authors unmodified script (10-run mean), divided by 60.

Deviations from the paper's protocol

Notes from the attempt

Assurance

What the harness enforced for this attempt, and what it predates. A legacy attempt is labelled, never rewritten.

Plan sealed
no
Sealed before scored execution
no
Evidence bound to artifact excerpts
no
Values extracted by a sealed rule
no
Execution manifest for cited jobs
no
Semantic re-derivation passed
yes
Predates
a sealed plan before scored execution, evidence bound to an exact artifact excerpt, an execution manifest per job (HEAD, status, diff hash, driver file hashes), the paper text hashed at create, jobs declared scored or unscored, a declared reason for every repeated result, an extraction rule per claim, fixed by the seal
Engine
report built by repro 0.2.1; attempt created by repro 0.1.0

Provenance

Driven by
operator:claude-opus-5-5 (Claude Code session)
Sandbox
6 CPUs, 6g memory, no GPU · image repro-sandbox:0.1
Period
2026-10-17T03:02:06.480Z → 2026-10-17T16:10:48.140Z
Event log
103 events, hash-chained; head fff4af80ae06041663152969f116b4bfeb3611deaf2623e761dc894922bddcf4
Verify
python3 openrepro_verify.py arxiv-1910-13051-20261017T030206Z checks the chain and every artifact with the Python standard library alone; repro verify also recomputes every quote match, evidence check and verdict and re-derives this report (engine 0.2.1) (the engine that does this is not yet public; the standalone verifier at /verify/ runs the chain and artifact checks).
Right of reply
Authors may submit a response, which is published alongside this report unedited.

← Back to the paper page