Implementing Time Series Cross Validation to Evaluate the Forecasting Model Performance

W. Sulandari, Y. Yudhanto, Sri Subanti, E. Zukhronah, Muhammad Zidni Subarkah
{"title":"Implementing Time Series Cross Validation to Evaluate the Forecasting Model Performance","authors":"W. Sulandari, Y. Yudhanto, Sri Subanti, E. Zukhronah, Muhammad Zidni Subarkah","doi":"10.18502/kls.v8i1.15584","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Theoretically, forecast error increases as the forecast horizon increases. This study aims to assess whether the statement is generally accepted or not. This study applies time series cross-validation to evaluate forecasting results up to seven steps ahead. As an illustration, we use Malaysia’s hourly electricity load data. Each hour is considered a series of each, so there are 24 daily series. Time series cross-validation with a 334 window was applied to 24 data series, and then each daily series was modeled with the Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA), Neural Network Autoregressive (NNAR), ExponenTial Smoothing (ETS), Singular Spectrum Analysis (SSA), and General Regression Neural Network (GRNN) models. In terms of mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) from one to seven steps ahead, we then evaluate the performance of all models. The experimental results show that the MAPEs obtained from the GRNN model tend to increase along with the theory. However, MAPEs obtained from ETS increase by up to three steps ahead and decrease after that. Among the five models, ARIMA, NNAR, and SSA produce a reasonably stable MAPE value for one to seven steps ahead. However, SSA has the most stable error value compared to ARIMA and NNAR. \nKeywords: time series, cross-validation, evaluate, forecasting model performance","PeriodicalId":17898,"journal":{"name":"KnE Life Sciences","volume":"40 22","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"KnE Life Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/kls.v8i1.15584","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Theoretically, forecast error increases as the forecast horizon increases. This study aims to assess whether the statement is generally accepted or not. This study applies time series cross-validation to evaluate forecasting results up to seven steps ahead. As an illustration, we use Malaysia’s hourly electricity load data. Each hour is considered a series of each, so there are 24 daily series. Time series cross-validation with a 334 window was applied to 24 data series, and then each daily series was modeled with the Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA), Neural Network Autoregressive (NNAR), ExponenTial Smoothing (ETS), Singular Spectrum Analysis (SSA), and General Regression Neural Network (GRNN) models. In terms of mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) from one to seven steps ahead, we then evaluate the performance of all models. The experimental results show that the MAPEs obtained from the GRNN model tend to increase along with the theory. However, MAPEs obtained from ETS increase by up to three steps ahead and decrease after that. Among the five models, ARIMA, NNAR, and SSA produce a reasonably stable MAPE value for one to seven steps ahead. However, SSA has the most stable error value compared to ARIMA and NNAR. Keywords: time series, cross-validation, evaluate, forecasting model performance
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用时间序列交叉验证评估预测模型性能
从理论上讲,预测误差会随着预测范围的增加而增大。本研究旨在评估这一说法是否被普遍接受。本研究采用时间序列交叉验证来评估提前七步的预测结果。我们以马来西亚的每小时电力负荷数据为例进行说明。每个小时被视为一个系列,因此每天有 24 个系列。对 24 个数据序列应用 334 窗口的时间序列交叉验证,然后用自回归综合移动平均(ARIMA)、神经网络自回归(NNAR)、指数平滑(ETS)、奇异谱分析(SSA)和一般回归神经网络(GRNN)模型对每个日序列进行建模。然后,我们用平均绝对百分比误差(MAPE)来评估所有模型的性能。实验结果表明,GRNN 模型获得的 MAPE 有随着理论的发展而增加的趋势。然而,从 ETS 模型中得到的 MAPE 最多会提前三步,之后就会降低。在这五种模型中,ARIMA、NNAR 和 SSA 模型的 MAPE 值在提前一到七步时比较稳定。然而,与 ARIMA 和 NNAR 相比,SSA 的误差值最为稳定。关键词:时间序列;交叉验证;评估;预测模型性能
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Application of Generalized Reciprocal Method on 2D Seismic Refraction Data in Mt. Manglayang, West Java Implementing Time Series Cross Validation to Evaluate the Forecasting Model Performance Analysis of Macroalgae Diversity in the West Coastal of Pananjung Beach, Pangandaran Ring Artifact on SPECT Image due to Arbitrary Position of PMT Malfunction Absorbance Optical Properties Calculation of ABX3 (A = Cs, Li; B = Pb; X = I, Br, Cl) Cubic Phase Using Density Functional Theory (DFT) Method
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1