TimeMaster: Training Time-Series Multimodal LLMs to Reason via Reinforcement Learning
About
Time-series reasoning remains a significant challenge in multimodal large language models (MLLMs) due to the dynamic temporal patterns, ambiguous semantics, and lack of temporal priors. In this work, we introduce TimeMaster, a reinforcement learning (RL)-based method that enables time-series MLLMs to perform structured, interpretable reasoning directly over visualized time-series inputs and task prompts. TimeMaster adopts a three-part structured output format, reasoning, classification, and domain-specific extension, and is optimized via a composite reward function that aligns format adherence, prediction accuracy, and open-ended insight quality. The model is trained using a two-stage pipeline: we first apply supervised fine-tuning (SFT) to establish a good initialization, followed by Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) at the token level to enable stable and targeted reward-driven improvement in time-series reasoning. We evaluate TimeMaster on the TimerBed benchmark across six real-world classification tasks based on Qwen2.5-VL-3B-Instruct. TimeMaster achieves state-of-the-art performance, outperforming both classical time-series models and few-shot GPT-4o by over 14.6% and 7.3% performance gain, respectively. Notably, TimeMaster goes beyond time-series classification: it also exhibits expert-like reasoning behavior, generates context-aware explanations, and delivers domain-aligned insights. Our results highlight that reward-driven RL can be a scalable and promising path toward integrating temporal understanding into time-series MLLMs.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time Series Reasoning | SLEEP QA | Acc0.7255 | 22 | |
| Time Series Reasoning | RCW | Accuracy76.99 | 22 | |
| Time Series Reasoning | TSQA | Accuracy61.22 | 22 | |
| Time Series Reasoning | ECG-QA | Accuracy69.31 | 22 | |
| Time Series Reasoning | TRQA | Accuracy72.08 | 22 | |
| Time Series Reasoning | ETI | Accuracy49 | 22 | |
| Anomaly Location Detection | AnomLLM (test) | Frequency Precision (P)57.3 | 14 | |
| Anomaly Classification | AnomLLM (test) | Accuracy57.9 | 13 |