IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jforec/v41y2022i5p1017-1036.html

A model sufficiency test using permutation entropy

Author

Listed:
  • Xin Huang
  • Han Lin Shang
  • David Pitt

Abstract

Using the ordinal‐pattern concept in permutation entropy, we propose a model sufficiency test to study a given model's point prediction accuracy. Compared with some classical model sufficiency tests, such as Broock et al.'s (1996) test, our proposal does not require a sufficient model to eliminate all structures exhibited in the estimated residuals. When the innovations in the investigated data's underlying dynamics show a certain structure, such as higher moment serial dependence, Broock et al.'s (1996) test can lead to erroneous conclusions about the sufficiency of point predictors. Due to the structured innovations, inconsistency between the model sufficiency tests and prediction accuracy criteria can occur. Our proposal fills in this incoherence between model and prediction evaluation approaches and remains valid when the underlying process has nonwhite additive innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Xin Huang & Han Lin Shang & David Pitt, 2022. "A model sufficiency test using permutation entropy," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(5), pages 1017-1036, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jforec:v:41:y:2022:i:5:p:1017-1036
    DOI: 10.1002/for.2849
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/for.2849
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/for.2849?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Diebold, Francis X & Mariano, Roberto S, 2002. "Comparing Predictive Accuracy," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 134-144, January.
    2. Graham Elliott & Allan Timmermann, 2016. "Economic Forecasting," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10740.
    3. Peter R. Hansen & Asger Lunde & James M. Nason, 2011. "The Model Confidence Set," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 453-497, March.
    4. Nesreen Ahmed & Amir Atiya & Neamat El Gayar & Hisham El-Shishiny, 2010. "An Empirical Comparison of Machine Learning Models for Time Series Forecasting," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(5-6), pages 594-621.
    5. Fernandes, Marcelo & Preumont, Pierre-Yves, 2012. "The Finite-Sample Size of the BDS Test for GARCH Standardized Residuals," Brazilian Review of Econometrics, Sociedade Brasileira de Econometria - SBE, vol. 32(2), April.
    6. Corradi, Valentina & Swanson, Norman R., 2005. "A Test For Comparing Multiple Misspecified Conditional Interval Models," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(5), pages 991-1016, October.
    7. Siroos Khademalomoom & Paresh Kumar Narayan & Susan Sunila Sharma, 2019. "Higher Moments and Exchange Rate Behavior," The Financial Review, Eastern Finance Association, vol. 54(1), pages 201-229, February.
    8. Martin Martens & Yuan‐Chen Chang & Stephen J. Taylor, 2002. "A Comparison of Seasonal Adjustment Methods When Forecasting Intraday Volatility," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 283-299, June.
    9. Clark, Todd E. & McCracken, Michael W., 2001. "Tests of equal forecast accuracy and encompassing for nested models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 85-110, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Laurent, Sébastien & Rombouts, Jeroen V.K. & Violante, Francesco, 2013. "On loss functions and ranking forecasting performances of multivariate volatility models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 173(1), pages 1-10.
    2. Hardy, Nicolás & Ferreira, Tiago & Quinteros, Maria J. & Magner, Nicolás S., 2023. "“Watch your tone!”: Forecasting mining industry commodity prices with financial report tone," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(PA).
    3. Philippe Goulet Coulombe & Maxime Leroux & Dalibor Stevanovic & Stéphane Surprenant, 2022. "How is machine learning useful for macroeconomic forecasting?," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(5), pages 920-964, August.
    4. Dimitriadis, Timo & Schnaitmann, Julie, 2021. "Forecast encompassing tests for the expected shortfall," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 604-621.
    5. Norman Swanson & Oleg Korenok, 2006. "The Incremental Predictive Information Associated with Using Theoretical New Keynesian DSGE Models Versus Simple Linear Alternatives," Departmental Working Papers 200615, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
    6. Rossi, Barbara & Sekhposyan, Tatevik, 2011. "Understanding models' forecasting performance," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 164(1), pages 158-172, September.
    7. Nowotarski, Jakub & Weron, Rafał, 2018. "Recent advances in electricity price forecasting: A review of probabilistic forecasting," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 1548-1568.
    8. Min Liu & Chien‐Chiang Lee & Wei‐Chong Choo, 2021. "An empirical study on the role of trading volume and data frequency in volatility forecasting," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(5), pages 792-816, August.
    9. Ricardo P. Masini & Marcelo C. Medeiros & Eduardo F. Mendes, 2023. "Machine learning advances for time series forecasting," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 76-111, February.
    10. Rafal Weron & Florian Ziel, 2018. "Electricity price forecasting," HSC Research Reports HSC/18/08, Hugo Steinhaus Center, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology.
    11. Zhang, Hongwei & Zhao, Xinyi & Gao, Wang & Niu, Zibo, 2023. "The role of higher moments in predicting China's oil futures volatility: Evidence from machine learning models," Journal of Commodity Markets, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    12. Zhanyi Jiao & Qiuqi Wang & Yimiao Zhao, 2025. "Standard and comparative e-backtests for general risk measures," Papers 2511.05840, arXiv.org.
    13. Jin, Sainan & Corradi, Valentina & Swanson, Norman R., 2017. "Robust Forecast Comparison," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(6), pages 1306-1351, December.
    14. Stanislav Anatolyev, 2007. "Inference about predictive ability when there are many predictors," Working Papers w0096, New Economic School (NES).
    15. Herrera, Ana María & Hu, Liang & Pastor, Daniel, 2018. "Forecasting crude oil price volatility," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 622-635.
    16. Philip Hans Franses & Michael McAleer & Rianne Legerstee, 2014. "Evaluating Macroeconomic Forecasts: A Concise Review Of Some Recent Developments," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 195-208, April.
    17. Becker, R. & Clements, A.E. & Doolan, M.B. & Hurn, A.S., 2015. "Selecting volatility forecasting models for portfolio allocation purposes," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 849-861.
    18. Zhu, Yinchu & Timmermann, Allan, 2022. "Conditional rotation between forecasting models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(2), pages 329-347.
    19. Norman Swanson & Oleg Korenok, 2006. "How Sticky Is Sticky Enough? A Distributional and Impulse Response Analysis of New Keynesian DSGE Models. Extended Working Paper Version," Departmental Working Papers 200612, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
    20. Kawakami, Kei, 2013. "Conditional forecast selection from many forecasts: An application to the Yen/Dollar exchange rate," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 1-18.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jforec:v:41:y:2022:i:5:p:1017-1036. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/2966 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.