SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Hacettepe Journal of Mathematics and Statistics / 2019 / Volume: 48 Issue: 6

ATA Method

Guckan Yapar(DOKUZ EYLUL UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-0971-6676
Hanife Taylan Selamlar(DOKUZ EYLUL UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-4091-884X
Sedat Capar(DOKUZ EYLUL UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-4741-4908
İdil Yavuz(DOKUZ EYLUL UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-2163-1066
Pages
—
Publication Date
2019-12-08
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Using the results from the M3-competition, the forecasting performance of this method will be compared to not only these two major approaches but also to other successful methods derived from these two approaches with respect to simplicity and cost in addition to accuracy.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, the forecasting accuracy of a new forecasting method that is alternative to two major forecasting approaches: exponential smoothing (ES) and ARIMA, will be evaluated.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, the forecasting accuracy of a new forecasting method that is alternative to two major forecasting approaches: exponential smoothing (ES) and ARIMA, will be evaluated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Using the results from the M3-competition, the forecasting performance of this method will be compared to not only these two major approaches but also to other successful methods derived from these two approaches with respect to simplicity and cost in addition to accuracy.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Exponential smoothing · Forecasting · Initial value

Abstract

In this study, the forecasting accuracy of a new forecasting method that is alternative to two major forecasting approaches: exponential smoothing (ES) and ARIMA, will be evaluated. Using the results from the M3-competition, the forecasting performance of this method will be compared to not only these two major approaches but also to other successful methods derived from these two approaches with respect to simplicity and cost in addition to accuracy.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yapar, G., Selamlar, H. T., Capar, S., Yavuz, İ. (2019). ATA Method. Hacettepe Journal of Mathematics and Statistics, Volume: 48 Issue: 6. https://doi.org/10.15672/hujms.461032

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (23)

  1. S. Makridakis and M. Hibon, The M3-Competition: results, conclusions and implications, Int. J. Forecast, 16 (4), 451–476, 2000.
  2. J. De Gooijer and R. Hyndman, 25 years of IIF time series forecasting: A selective review, Int. J. Forecast, 22 (3), 443–473, 2006.
  3. P. Goodwin, The holt-winters approach to exponential smoothing: 50 years old and going strong, Foresight, 19, 30–33, 2010.
  4. R. Hyndman, A. Koehler, R. Snyder and S. Grose, A state space framework for automatic forecasting using exponential smoothing methods, Int. J. Forecast, 13 (3), 439–454, 2002.
  5. R. Hyndman, A. Koehler, J. Ord and R. Snyder, Forecasting with exponential smoothing: the state space approach, Springer-Verlag, 2008.
  6. R. Hyndman and G. Athanasopoulos, Forecasting: principles and practice, OTexts, 2014.
  7. C. Pegels, On startup or learning curves: An expanded view, AIIE Transactions, 1 (3), 216–222, 1969.
  8. E. Gardner Jr and E. McKenzie, Forecasting trends in time series, Management Science, 31 (10), 1237–1246, 1985.
  9. S. Makridakis, A. Andersen, R. Carbone, R. Fildes, M. Hibon, R. Lewandowski, J. Newton, E. Parzen and R. Winkler, The forecasting accuracy of major time series methods, Wiley, 1984.
  10. A. Koning, P. Franses, M. Hibon abd H. Stekler, The M3 competition: Statistical tests of the results, Int. J. Forecast, 21 (3), 397–409, 2005.
  11. V. Assimakopoulos and K. Nikolopoulos, The theta model: a decomposition approach to forecasting, Int. J. Forecast, 16 (4), 521–430, 2000.
  12. R. Hyndman and B. Billah, Unmasking the Theta method, Int. J. Forecast, 19 (2), 287–290, 2003.
  13. J. Bates and C. Granger, The combination of forecasts, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 20 (4), 451–468, 1969.
  14. R. Clemen, Combining forecasts: A review and annotated bibliography, Int. J. Forecast, 5 (4), 559–583, 1989.
  15. J. Armstrong, Combining forecasts: The end of the beginning or the beginning of the end?, Int. J. Forecast, 5 (4), 585–588, 1989.
  16. J. Armstrong, Principles of forecasting: a handbook for researchers and practitioners, Springer Science & Business Media, 2001.
  17. S. Makridakis and R. Winkler, Averages of forecasts: Some empirical results, Management Science, 29 (9), 987–996, 1983.
  18. S. Makridakis, A. Andersen, R. Carbone, R. Fildes, M. Hibon, R. Lewandowski, J. Newton, E. Parzen and R. Winkler, The accuracy of extrapolation (time series) methods: Results of a forecasting competition, J. Forecast., 1 (2), 111–153, 1982.
  19. R. Cleveland, W. Cleveland, J. McRae and I. Terpenning, STL: A seasonal-trend decomposition procedure based on loess, Journal of Official Statistics, 6 (1), 3–73, 1990.
  20. M. Adya, J. Armstrong, F. Collopy and M. Kennedy, An application of rule-based forecasting to a situation lacking domain knowledge, Int. J. Forecast, 16 (4), 477–484, 2000.
  21. C. Bergmeir, R. Hyndman and J. Benitez, Bagging exponential smoothing methods using STL decomposition and Box–Cox transformation, Int. J. Forecast, 32 (2), 303– 312, 2016.
  22. G. Yapar, Modified simple exponential smoothing, Hacet. J. Math. Stat., 47 (3), 741– 754, 2018.
  23. G. Yapar, S. Capar, H. Selamlar and I. Yavuz, Modified Holt’s linear trend method, Hacet. J. Math. Stat., 47 (5), 1394–1403, 2018.