IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Correspondence On the Selection of Error Measures for Comparisons Among Forecasting Methods

  • JS Armstrong

    (The Wharton School - University of Pennsylvania)

  • Robert Fildes

    (The Management School - Lancaster University - UK)

Clements and Hendry (1993) proposed the Generalized Forecast Error Second Moment (GFESM) as an improvement to the Mean Square Error in comparing forecasting performance across data series. They based their conclusion on the fact that rankings based on GFESM remain unaltered if the series are linearly transformed. In this paper, we argue that this evaluation ignores other important criteria. Also, their conclusions were illustrated by a simulation study whose relationship to real data was not obvious. Thirdly, prior empirical studies show that the mean square error is an inappropriate measure to serve as a basis for comparison. This undermines the claims made for the GFESM.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://econwpa.repec.org/eps/get/papers/0412/0412002.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by EconWPA in its series General Economics and Teaching with number 0412002.

as
in new window

Length: 4 pages
Date of creation: 06 Dec 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpgt:0412002
Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 4
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://econwpa.repec.org

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Makridakis, Spyros & Hibon, Michele & Lusk, Ed & Belhadjali, Moncef, 1987. "Confidence intervals: An empirical investigation of the series in the M-competition," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 3(3-4), pages 489-508.
  2. Zellner, Arnold, 1986. "A tale of forecasting 1001 series : The Bayesian knight strikes again," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 491-494.
  3. Thompson, Patrick A., 1990. "An MSE statistic for comparing forecast accuracy across series," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 219-227, July.
  4. Murphy, Allan H. & Winkler, Robert L., 1992. "Diagnostic verification of probability forecasts," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 435-455, March.
  5. Clements, M.P. & Hendry, D., 1992. "On the Limitations of Comparing Mean Square Forecast Errors," Economics Series Working Papers 99138, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  6. Fildes, Robert, 1992. "The evaluation of extrapolative forecasting methods," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 81-98, June.
  7. Robert Carbone & JS Armstrong, 2004. "Evaluation of Extrapolative Forecasting Methods: Results of a Survey of Academicians and Practitioners," General Economics and Teaching 0412008, EconWPA.
  8. Armstrong, J. Scott & Collopy, Fred, 1992. "Error measures for generalizing about forecasting methods: Empirical comparisons," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 69-80, June.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpgt:0412002. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (EconWPA)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.