Commentary by J. Scott Armstrong on Fildes et al.: Generalizing about univariate forecasting methods: further empirical evidence
J. Armstrong
General Economics and Teaching from University Library of Munich, Germany
Abstract:
Fildes, Hibon, Makridakis and Meade (1998), which will be referred to as FHMM, extends two important published papers. The idea of taking findings from each study and testing them against the data used in the other study is a good one. Such replications and extensions are important in the effort to develop useful generalizations and publication of this paper reflects the commitment of International Journal of Forecasting to replication research. In addition the study examines procedures for estimating smoothing parameters, and it evaluates the need for using multiple starting points when evaluating forecasting methods. On the negative side, FHMM does not fully describe the conditions under which one might expect a given extrapolation method to provide more accurate forecasts than competing methods. This limits the generalizability of its findings. In addition, I believe that the FHMM generalizations are even more limited than they might appear at first glance.
Keywords: forecasting; univariate forecasting methods (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 3 pages
Date: 2005-02-04
Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 3
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:
Downloads: (external link)
https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/get/papers/0502/0502019.pdf (application/pdf)
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wpa:wuwpgt:0502019
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in General Economics and Teaching from University Library of Munich, Germany
Bibliographic data for series maintained by EconWPA ( this e-mail address is bad, please contact ).