Journals / Pamukkale Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 4

A comparison of sales forecasting methods for a feed company: A case study

Bir yem işletmesi için satış tahmin yöntemlerinin karşılaştırılması: Bir vaka çalışması

Pages
705–712
Publication Date
2018-08-17
DOI
—
🏛️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)

The results show that support vector machines produces significantly better results comparing to both time series methods and artificial neural networks.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Due to global warming in recent years, using natural resources in an effective way has become more and more important to our world.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Decreasing natural resources are pushing agriculture and food chains to adopt more efficient management strategies.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results show that support vector machines produces significantly better results comparing to both time series methods and artificial neural networks.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Satış tahmini · Zaman serisi yöntemleri · Yapay sinir ağları

Abstract

Due to global warming in recent years, using natural resources in an effective way has become more and more important to our world. Decreasing natural resources are pushing agriculture and food chains to adopt more efficient management strategies. The first condition for a successful management is to make plans based on accurate and reliable forecasts. In this study, using real-world data, forecasting models are compared for the products of a feed company which is the first chain of agriculture and food chain systems. The traditional statistical time series methods are compared to two popular and effective computational intelligence techniques, i.e. artificial neural networks and support vector regression. The accuracy of the forecasts is calculated by three different error measures, i.e., the mean absolute error (MAE), the mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), and the mean squared error (MSE). The results show that support vector machines produces significantly better results comparing to both time series methods and artificial neural networks.

Özet

Son yıllarda küresel ısınmadan dolayı doğal kaynakların etkin ve verimli kullanımı dünyamız için daha da önemli bir hale gelmiştir. Azalan doğal kaynaklar tarım ve gıda zincirlerini daha etkin yönetim stratejileri benimsemeye zorlamaktadır. Başarılı bir yönetimin ilk şartı doğru ve güvenilir tahminlere dayalı planlar yapmaktır. Bu çalışmada tarım ve gıda zincirlerinin ilk halkası olan yem endüstrisinde yer alan bir işletme için gerçek verilere dayalı olarak oluşturulan tahmin modelleri karşılaştırılmıştır. Geleneksel istatistiksel zaman serisi yöntemleri popüler ve hesaplamalı olarak etkin iki yapay zekâ tekniği olan yapay sinir ağları ve destek vektör regresyonu yöntemleri ile karşılaştırılmıştır. Tahminlerin doğruluğu ortalama mutlak hata (MAE), ortalama mutlak yüzde hata (MAPE) ve ortalama hata kare (MSE) gibi üç farklı hata ölçütü kullanılarak hesaplanmıştır. Sonuçlar destek vektör regresyonu yönteminin zaman serisi ve yapay sinir ağları yöntemlerine göre daha iyi sonuçlar ürettiğini göstermiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

DEMİR, L., AKKAŞ, S. (2018). A comparison of sales forecasting methods for a feed company: A case study. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 4, 705–712. https://ajindex.com/articles/42339

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. McCarthy TM, Davis DF, Golicic SL, Mentzer JT. “The evolution of sales forecasting management: a 20-year longitudinal study of forecasting practices”. Journal of Forecasting, 25(5), 303-324, 2006.
  2. Syntetos AA, Babai Z, Boylan JE, Kolassa S, Nikolopoulos, K. “Supply chain forecasting: theory, practice, their gap and the future”. European Journal of Operational Research, 252(1), 1-26, 2016.
  3. Caniato F, Kalchschmidt M, Ronchi S, Verganti R, Zotteri G. “Clustering customers to forecast demand”. Production Planning and Control, 16(1), 32-43, 2005.
  4. Kalchschmidt M, Verganti R, Zotteri G. “Forecasting demand from heterogeneous customers”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 26(6), 619-638, 2006.
  5. Widiarta H, Viswanathan S, Piplani R. “Forecasting item-level demands: an analytical evaluation of top–down versus bottom–up forecasting in a production- planning framework”. IMA Journal of Management Mathematics, 19(2), 207-218, 2008.
  6. Sbrana G, Silvestrini, S. “Forecasting aggregate demand: analytical comparison of top-down and bottom-up approaches in a multivariate exponential smoothing framework”. International Journal of Production Economics, 146(1), 185-198, 2013.
  7. Widiarta H, Viswanathan S, Piplani R. “Forecasting aggregate demand: an analytical evaluation of top–down versus bottom–up forecasting in a production-planning framework”. International Journal of Production Economics, 118(1), 87-94, 2009.International Journal of Production Economics, 118(1), 87-94, 2009. Kerkkänen A, Korpela J, Huiskonen J. “Demand forecasting errors in industrial context: measurement and impacts”. International Journal of Production Economics, 118(1), 43-48, 2009.
  8. Martins VLM, Werner L. “Forecast combination in industrial series: a comparison between individual forecasts and its combinations with and without correlated errors”. Experts Systems with Applications, 39(13), 11479-11486, 2012.
  9. Acar Y, Everette SGJ. “Forecasting method selection in a global supply chain”. International Journal of Forecasting, 28(4), 842-848, 2012.
  10. Ansuj AP, Camargo ME, Radharamanan R, Petry DG. “Sales forecasting using time series and neural networks”. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 31(1-2), 421-424, 1996.
  11. Alon I, Qi M, Sadowski, RJ. “Forecasting aggregate retail sales: a comparison of artificial neural networks and traditional methods”. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 8(3), 147-156, 2001.
  12. Thomassey S, Happiette M. “A neural clustering and classification system for sales