To classify time series by nearest neighbors, we need to specify or learn one or several distance measures. We consider variations of the Mahalanobis distance measures which rely on the inverse covariance matrix of the data. Unfortunately--for time series data--the covariance matrix has often low rank. To alleviate this problem we can either use a pseudoinverse, covariance shrinking or limit the matrix to its diagonal. We review these alternatives and benchmark them against competitive methods such as the related Large Margin Nearest Neighbor Classification (LMNN) and the Dynamic Time Warping (DTW) distance. As we expected, we find that the DTW is superior, but the Mahalanobis distance measures are one to two orders of magnitude faster. To get best results with Mahalanobis distance measures, we recommend learning one distance measure per class using either covariance shrinking or the diagonal approach.
The last decade has witnessed a tremendous growths of interests in applications that deal with querying and mining of time series data. Numerous representation methods for dimensionality reduction and similarity measures geared towards time series have been introduced. Each individual work introducing a particular method has made specific claims and, aside from the occasional theoretical justifications, provided quantitative experimental observations. However, for the most part, the comparative aspects of these experiments were too narrowly focused on demonstrating the benefits of the proposed methods over some of the previously introduced ones. In order to provide a comprehensive validation, we conducted an extensive set of time series experiments re-implementing 8 different representation methods and 9 similarity measures and their variants, and testing their effectiveness on 38 time series data sets from a wide variety of application domains. In this paper, we give an overview of these different techniques and present our comparative experimental findings regarding their effectiveness. Our experiments have provided both a unified validation of some of the existing achievements, and in some cases, suggested that certain claims in the literature may be unduly optimistic.