跨多个时间序列评估点预测偏差:测量和可视化工具

A. Davydenko, P. Goodwin
{"title":"跨多个时间序列评估点预测偏差:测量和可视化工具","authors":"A. Davydenko, P. Goodwin","doi":"10.20944/PREPRINTS202105.0261.V1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Measuring bias is important as it helps identify flaws in quantitative forecasting methods or judgmental forecasts. It can, therefore, potentially help improve forecasts. Despite this, bias tends to be under-represented in the literature: many studies focus solely on measuring accuracy. Methods for assessing bias in single series are relatively well-known and well-researched, but for datasets containing thousands of observations for multiple series, the methodology for measuring and reporting bias is less obvious. We compare alternative approaches against a number of criteria when rolling-origin point forecasts are available for different forecasting methods and for multiple horizons over multiple series. We focus on relatively simple, yet interpretable and easy-to-implement metrics and visualization tools that are likely to be applicable in practice. To study the statistical properties of alternative measures we use theoretical concepts and simulation experiments based on artificial data with predetermined features. We describe the difference between mean and median bias, describe the connection between metrics for accuracy and bias, provide suitable bias measures depending on the loss function used to optimise forecasts, and suggest which measures for accuracy should be used to accompany bias indicators. We propose several new measures and provide our recommendations on how to evaluate forecast bias across multiple series.","PeriodicalId":89781,"journal":{"name":"International journal of statistics and probability","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Point Forecast Bias Across Multiple Time Series: Measures and Visual Tools\",\"authors\":\"A. Davydenko, P. Goodwin\",\"doi\":\"10.20944/PREPRINTS202105.0261.V1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Measuring bias is important as it helps identify flaws in quantitative forecasting methods or judgmental forecasts. It can, therefore, potentially help improve forecasts. Despite this, bias tends to be under-represented in the literature: many studies focus solely on measuring accuracy. Methods for assessing bias in single series are relatively well-known and well-researched, but for datasets containing thousands of observations for multiple series, the methodology for measuring and reporting bias is less obvious. We compare alternative approaches against a number of criteria when rolling-origin point forecasts are available for different forecasting methods and for multiple horizons over multiple series. We focus on relatively simple, yet interpretable and easy-to-implement metrics and visualization tools that are likely to be applicable in practice. To study the statistical properties of alternative measures we use theoretical concepts and simulation experiments based on artificial data with predetermined features. We describe the difference between mean and median bias, describe the connection between metrics for accuracy and bias, provide suitable bias measures depending on the loss function used to optimise forecasts, and suggest which measures for accuracy should be used to accompany bias indicators. We propose several new measures and provide our recommendations on how to evaluate forecast bias across multiple series.\",\"PeriodicalId\":89781,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of statistics and probability\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of statistics and probability\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20944/PREPRINTS202105.0261.V1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of statistics and probability","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20944/PREPRINTS202105.0261.V1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

衡量偏差很重要,因为它有助于识别定量预测方法或判断预测中的缺陷。因此,它可能有助于改善预测。尽管如此,文献中的偏见往往没有得到充分的体现:许多研究只关注测量准确性。在单个系列中评估偏差的方法相对来说是众所周知的,并且研究得很好,但对于包含多个系列数千个观测值的数据集,测量和报告偏差的方法就不那么明显了。当滚动原点预测可用于不同的预测方法和多个系列的多个层位时,我们将替代方法与许多标准进行比较。我们专注于相对简单但可解释且易于实现的度量标准和可视化工具,这些工具可能在实践中适用。为了研究替代测量的统计特性,我们使用了基于具有预定特征的人工数据的理论概念和模拟实验。我们描述了平均偏差和中值偏差之间的差异,描述了准确性和偏差指标之间的联系,根据用于优化预测的损失函数提供了合适的偏差指标,并建议应使用哪些准确性指标作为偏差指标。我们提出了几个新的衡量标准,并就如何评估多个系列的预测偏差提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing Point Forecast Bias Across Multiple Time Series: Measures and Visual Tools
Measuring bias is important as it helps identify flaws in quantitative forecasting methods or judgmental forecasts. It can, therefore, potentially help improve forecasts. Despite this, bias tends to be under-represented in the literature: many studies focus solely on measuring accuracy. Methods for assessing bias in single series are relatively well-known and well-researched, but for datasets containing thousands of observations for multiple series, the methodology for measuring and reporting bias is less obvious. We compare alternative approaches against a number of criteria when rolling-origin point forecasts are available for different forecasting methods and for multiple horizons over multiple series. We focus on relatively simple, yet interpretable and easy-to-implement metrics and visualization tools that are likely to be applicable in practice. To study the statistical properties of alternative measures we use theoretical concepts and simulation experiments based on artificial data with predetermined features. We describe the difference between mean and median bias, describe the connection between metrics for accuracy and bias, provide suitable bias measures depending on the loss function used to optimise forecasts, and suggest which measures for accuracy should be used to accompany bias indicators. We propose several new measures and provide our recommendations on how to evaluate forecast bias across multiple series.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信