LightSNN: An energy-aware spiking neural network architecture for time series forecasting


Abstract

Spiking Neural Networks (SNNs) offer significant energy efficiency compared to traditional deep learning models, though they often suffer from reduced prediction accuracy when forecasting continuous-valued signals. We introduce LightSNN, a time-series forecasting architecture that bridges this gap by holistically optimizing for both forecast accuracy and energy efficiency. Based on the Leaky Integrate-and-Fire (LIF) neuron model, LightSNN enhances performance by unifying three orthogonal mechanisms: (1) lightweight temporal gating to prune non-salient input features, (2) neuron-wise adaptive thresholding to dynamically regulate firing activity toward a target sparsity, and (3) knowledge distillation from a high-performing non-spiking teacher model to preserve the amplitude fidelity of the output signal. A tailored two-phase training framework leverages surrogate gradient backpropagation to jointly optimize for accurate regression and low computational overhead. Extensive experiments across four real-world datasets show that LightSNN matches or surpasses a standard RNN-based baseline in forecasting accuracy while dramatically reducing the estimated Energy-Delay Product, as verified through both analytical MAC/AC evaluations and neuromorphic hardware profiling. By combining event-driven sparsity with mechanisms that preserve continuous-valued information, LightSNN provides a viable, energy-efficient forecasting solution particularly suited for deployment in resource-constrained environments such as smart grid systems and edge AI devices, where both computational efficiency and predictive reliability are critical.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].