Mincer–Zarnowitz quantile and expectile regressions for forecast evaluations under aysmmetric loss functions

Forecasts are pervasive in all areas of applications in business and daily life. Hence evaluating the accuracy of a forecast is important for both the generators and consumers of forecasts. There are two aspects in forecast evaluation: (a) measuring the accuracy of past forecasts using some summary...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of forecasting 2017-09, Vol.36 (6), p.651-679
Hauptverfasser: Guler, Kemal, Ng, Pin T., Xiao, Zhijie
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 679
container_issue 6
container_start_page 651
container_title Journal of forecasting
container_volume 36
creator Guler, Kemal
Ng, Pin T.
Xiao, Zhijie
description Forecasts are pervasive in all areas of applications in business and daily life. Hence evaluating the accuracy of a forecast is important for both the generators and consumers of forecasts. There are two aspects in forecast evaluation: (a) measuring the accuracy of past forecasts using some summary statistics, and (b) testing the optimality properties of the forecasts through some diagnostic tests. On measuring the accuracy of a past forecast, this paper illustrates that the summary statistics used should match the loss function that was used to generate the forecast. If there is strong evidence that an asymmetric loss function has been used in the generation of a forecast, then a summary statistic that corresponds to that asymmetric loss function should be used in assessing the accuracy of the forecast instead of the popular root mean square error or mean absolute error. On testing the optimality of the forecasts, it is demonstrated how the quantile regressions set in the prediction–realization framework of Mincer and Zarnowitz (in J. Mincer (Ed.), Economic Forecasts and Expectations: Analysis of Forecasting Behavior and Performance (pp. 14–20), 1969) can be used to recover the unknown parameter that controls the potentially asymmetric loss function used in generating the past forecasts. Finally, the prediction–realization framework is applied to the Federal Reserve's economic growth forecast and forecast sharing in a PC manufacturing supply chain. It is found that the Federal Reserve values overprediction approximately 1.5 times more costly than underprediction. It is also found that the PC manufacturer weighs positive forecast errors (under forecasts) about four times as costly as negative forecast errors (over forecasts).
doi_str_mv 10.1002/for.2462
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1928298714</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1928298714</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3252-776a024ccb697c52347c6107cf58368d55cc93ee69a94af3018303c0bc137a503</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kMFKAzEQhoMoWKvgIyx48bJ1kuwmm6MUq0KlIAriJaTTrGxps22ya60n38E39ElMt149DMPwf8w_8xNyTmFAAdhVWfsBywQ7ID0KSqWU05dD0gMmZSqE4sfkJIQ5AMiCsh5xD5VD63--vl-Nd_Wmaj6TdWtcUy1sYtwssR8ri93k7Zu3IVS1C0l02ZVFE5rEvptFa5pOaN3M-sRsw3JpG19hsqhDxFuHnX5KjkqzCPbsr_fJ8-jmaXiXjie398PrcYqc5SyVUhhgGeJUKIk545lEQUFimRdcFLM8R1TcWqGMykzJgRYcOMIUKZcmB94nF_u9K1-vWxsaPa9b76KlpooVTBWSZpG63FPo45Xelnrlq6XxW01B79LU8Ue9SzOi6R7dxCi2_3J6NHns-F9lvnj4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1928298714</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Mincer–Zarnowitz quantile and expectile regressions for forecast evaluations under aysmmetric loss functions</title><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Guler, Kemal ; Ng, Pin T. ; Xiao, Zhijie</creator><creatorcontrib>Guler, Kemal ; Ng, Pin T. ; Xiao, Zhijie</creatorcontrib><description>Forecasts are pervasive in all areas of applications in business and daily life. Hence evaluating the accuracy of a forecast is important for both the generators and consumers of forecasts. There are two aspects in forecast evaluation: (a) measuring the accuracy of past forecasts using some summary statistics, and (b) testing the optimality properties of the forecasts through some diagnostic tests. On measuring the accuracy of a past forecast, this paper illustrates that the summary statistics used should match the loss function that was used to generate the forecast. If there is strong evidence that an asymmetric loss function has been used in the generation of a forecast, then a summary statistic that corresponds to that asymmetric loss function should be used in assessing the accuracy of the forecast instead of the popular root mean square error or mean absolute error. On testing the optimality of the forecasts, it is demonstrated how the quantile regressions set in the prediction–realization framework of Mincer and Zarnowitz (in J. Mincer (Ed.), Economic Forecasts and Expectations: Analysis of Forecasting Behavior and Performance (pp. 14–20), 1969) can be used to recover the unknown parameter that controls the potentially asymmetric loss function used in generating the past forecasts. Finally, the prediction–realization framework is applied to the Federal Reserve's economic growth forecast and forecast sharing in a PC manufacturing supply chain. It is found that the Federal Reserve values overprediction approximately 1.5 times more costly than underprediction. It is also found that the PC manufacturer weighs positive forecast errors (under forecasts) about four times as costly as negative forecast errors (over forecasts).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0277-6693</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1099-131X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/for.2462</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester: Wiley Periodicals Inc</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Activities of daily living ; asymmetric loss, expectile regression, forecast evaluation, quantile regression ; Asymmetry ; Consumers ; Diagnostic tests ; Economic forecasts ; Economic growth ; Estimating techniques ; Forecasting ; Supply</subject><ispartof>Journal of forecasting, 2017-09, Vol.36 (6), p.651-679</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2017 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3252-776a024ccb697c52347c6107cf58368d55cc93ee69a94af3018303c0bc137a503</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3252-776a024ccb697c52347c6107cf58368d55cc93ee69a94af3018303c0bc137a503</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Ffor.2462$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Ffor.2462$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Guler, Kemal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ng, Pin T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xiao, Zhijie</creatorcontrib><title>Mincer–Zarnowitz quantile and expectile regressions for forecast evaluations under aysmmetric loss functions</title><title>Journal of forecasting</title><description>Forecasts are pervasive in all areas of applications in business and daily life. Hence evaluating the accuracy of a forecast is important for both the generators and consumers of forecasts. There are two aspects in forecast evaluation: (a) measuring the accuracy of past forecasts using some summary statistics, and (b) testing the optimality properties of the forecasts through some diagnostic tests. On measuring the accuracy of a past forecast, this paper illustrates that the summary statistics used should match the loss function that was used to generate the forecast. If there is strong evidence that an asymmetric loss function has been used in the generation of a forecast, then a summary statistic that corresponds to that asymmetric loss function should be used in assessing the accuracy of the forecast instead of the popular root mean square error or mean absolute error. On testing the optimality of the forecasts, it is demonstrated how the quantile regressions set in the prediction–realization framework of Mincer and Zarnowitz (in J. Mincer (Ed.), Economic Forecasts and Expectations: Analysis of Forecasting Behavior and Performance (pp. 14–20), 1969) can be used to recover the unknown parameter that controls the potentially asymmetric loss function used in generating the past forecasts. Finally, the prediction–realization framework is applied to the Federal Reserve's economic growth forecast and forecast sharing in a PC manufacturing supply chain. It is found that the Federal Reserve values overprediction approximately 1.5 times more costly than underprediction. It is also found that the PC manufacturer weighs positive forecast errors (under forecasts) about four times as costly as negative forecast errors (over forecasts).</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Activities of daily living</subject><subject>asymmetric loss, expectile regression, forecast evaluation, quantile regression</subject><subject>Asymmetry</subject><subject>Consumers</subject><subject>Diagnostic tests</subject><subject>Economic forecasts</subject><subject>Economic growth</subject><subject>Estimating techniques</subject><subject>Forecasting</subject><subject>Supply</subject><issn>0277-6693</issn><issn>1099-131X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kMFKAzEQhoMoWKvgIyx48bJ1kuwmm6MUq0KlIAriJaTTrGxps22ya60n38E39ElMt149DMPwf8w_8xNyTmFAAdhVWfsBywQ7ID0KSqWU05dD0gMmZSqE4sfkJIQ5AMiCsh5xD5VD63--vl-Nd_Wmaj6TdWtcUy1sYtwssR8ri93k7Zu3IVS1C0l02ZVFE5rEvptFa5pOaN3M-sRsw3JpG19hsqhDxFuHnX5KjkqzCPbsr_fJ8-jmaXiXjie398PrcYqc5SyVUhhgGeJUKIk545lEQUFimRdcFLM8R1TcWqGMykzJgRYcOMIUKZcmB94nF_u9K1-vWxsaPa9b76KlpooVTBWSZpG63FPo45Xelnrlq6XxW01B79LU8Ue9SzOi6R7dxCi2_3J6NHns-F9lvnj4</recordid><startdate>201709</startdate><enddate>201709</enddate><creator>Guler, Kemal</creator><creator>Ng, Pin T.</creator><creator>Xiao, Zhijie</creator><general>Wiley Periodicals Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201709</creationdate><title>Mincer–Zarnowitz quantile and expectile regressions for forecast evaluations under aysmmetric loss functions</title><author>Guler, Kemal ; Ng, Pin T. ; Xiao, Zhijie</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3252-776a024ccb697c52347c6107cf58368d55cc93ee69a94af3018303c0bc137a503</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Activities of daily living</topic><topic>asymmetric loss, expectile regression, forecast evaluation, quantile regression</topic><topic>Asymmetry</topic><topic>Consumers</topic><topic>Diagnostic tests</topic><topic>Economic forecasts</topic><topic>Economic growth</topic><topic>Estimating techniques</topic><topic>Forecasting</topic><topic>Supply</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Guler, Kemal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ng, Pin T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xiao, Zhijie</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Journal of forecasting</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Guler, Kemal</au><au>Ng, Pin T.</au><au>Xiao, Zhijie</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Mincer–Zarnowitz quantile and expectile regressions for forecast evaluations under aysmmetric loss functions</atitle><jtitle>Journal of forecasting</jtitle><date>2017-09</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>651</spage><epage>679</epage><pages>651-679</pages><issn>0277-6693</issn><eissn>1099-131X</eissn><abstract>Forecasts are pervasive in all areas of applications in business and daily life. Hence evaluating the accuracy of a forecast is important for both the generators and consumers of forecasts. There are two aspects in forecast evaluation: (a) measuring the accuracy of past forecasts using some summary statistics, and (b) testing the optimality properties of the forecasts through some diagnostic tests. On measuring the accuracy of a past forecast, this paper illustrates that the summary statistics used should match the loss function that was used to generate the forecast. If there is strong evidence that an asymmetric loss function has been used in the generation of a forecast, then a summary statistic that corresponds to that asymmetric loss function should be used in assessing the accuracy of the forecast instead of the popular root mean square error or mean absolute error. On testing the optimality of the forecasts, it is demonstrated how the quantile regressions set in the prediction–realization framework of Mincer and Zarnowitz (in J. Mincer (Ed.), Economic Forecasts and Expectations: Analysis of Forecasting Behavior and Performance (pp. 14–20), 1969) can be used to recover the unknown parameter that controls the potentially asymmetric loss function used in generating the past forecasts. Finally, the prediction–realization framework is applied to the Federal Reserve's economic growth forecast and forecast sharing in a PC manufacturing supply chain. It is found that the Federal Reserve values overprediction approximately 1.5 times more costly than underprediction. It is also found that the PC manufacturer weighs positive forecast errors (under forecasts) about four times as costly as negative forecast errors (over forecasts).</abstract><cop>Chichester</cop><pub>Wiley Periodicals Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/for.2462</doi><tpages>29</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0277-6693
ispartof Journal of forecasting, 2017-09, Vol.36 (6), p.651-679
issn 0277-6693
1099-131X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1928298714
source EBSCOhost Business Source Complete; Wiley Online Library All Journals
subjects Accuracy
Activities of daily living
asymmetric loss, expectile regression, forecast evaluation, quantile regression
Asymmetry
Consumers
Diagnostic tests
Economic forecasts
Economic growth
Estimating techniques
Forecasting
Supply
title Mincer–Zarnowitz quantile and expectile regressions for forecast evaluations under aysmmetric loss functions
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T11%3A21%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Mincer%E2%80%93Zarnowitz%20quantile%20and%20expectile%20regressions%20for%20forecast%20evaluations%20under%20aysmmetric%20loss%20functions&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20forecasting&rft.au=Guler,%20Kemal&rft.date=2017-09&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=651&rft.epage=679&rft.pages=651-679&rft.issn=0277-6693&rft.eissn=1099-131X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/for.2462&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1928298714%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1928298714&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true