Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Combination of Multi Level Forecasts

  • Published:
The Journal of VLSI Signal Processing Systems for Signal, Image, and Video Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper provides a discussion of the effects of different multi-level learning approaches on the resulting out of sample forecast errors in the case of difficult real-world forecasting problems with large noise terms in the training data, frequently occurring structural breaks and quickly changing environments. In order to benefit from the advantages of learning on different aggregation levels and to reduce the risks of high noise terms on low level predictions and overgeneralization on higher levels, various approaches of using information at different levels are analysed in relation to their effects on the bias, variance and Bayes error components proposed by James and Hastie. We provide an extension of this decomposition for the multi-level case. An extensive analysis is also carried out answering the question of why the combination of predictions using information learned at different levels constitutes a significantly better approach in comparison to using only the predictions generated at one of the levels or other multi-level approaches. Additionally we argue why multi-level combinations should be used in addition to thick modelling and the use of different function spaces. Significant forecast improvements have been obtained when using the proposed multi-level combination approaches.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. G. Fliedner, “Hierarchical Forecasting: Issues and Use Guidelines,” Ind. Manage. Data Syst., vol. 1, 2001, pp. 5–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. G. James and T. Hastie, “Generalisations of the Bias/Variance Decomposition for Prediction Error”, technical report, http://www.stat.stanford.edu/~gareth/ftp/papers/bv.ps, 1996.

  3. T. D. Russell and E. E. Adam, “An Empirical Evaluation of Alternative Forecast Combinations,” Eur. J. Oper. Res. Econ., vol. 33, 1987, pp. 1267–1276.

    Google Scholar 

  4. L. M. De Menezes et al., “Review of Guidelines for the Use of Combined Forecasts,” Manage. Sci., vol. 120, 2000, pp. 190–204.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. A. G. Timmermann, “Forecast Combinations”, Discussion paper no. 5361, http://www.cepr.org/pubs/dps/DP5361.asp, 2005.

  6. S. Makridakis et al., “The m2 Competition: A Real-Time Judgementally Based Forecasting Study”, Int. J. Forecast., vol. 9, 1993, pp. 5–22.

    Google Scholar 

  7. J. M. Bates and C. W. J. Granger, “The Combination of Forecasts,” Operations Research Quarterly, vol. 20, 1969, pp. 451–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. C. W. J. Granger and R. Ramanathan, “Improved Methods of Forecasting,” J. Forecast., vol. 3, 1984, pp. 197–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. E. W. Bunn, “Statistical Efficiency on the Linear Combination of Forecasts,” Int. J. Forecast., vol. 1, 1985, pp. 151–163.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. J. V. Hansen, “Combining Predictors. Meta Machine Learning Methods and Bias/Variance and Ambiguity Decompositions,” Ph.D. dissertation, 2000.

  11. S. Geman, E. Bienenstock, and R. Doursat, “Neural Networks and the Bias- Variance Dilemma,” Neural Comput., vol. 4, no. 1, 1992, pp. 1–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. R. G. Cross, “Revenue Management,” Broadway Books, 1997.

  13. McGill and van Ryzin, “Revenue Management: Research Overview and Prospects,” Transp. Sci., vol. 33, no. 4, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  14. C. W. J. Granger and Y. Jeon, “Thick Modelling,” Econometric Modelling, vol. 21, 2004, pp. 323–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. M. Aiolfo and C. A. Favero, “Model Uncertainty, Thick Modelling and the Predictability of Stock Returns,” J. Forecast., vol. 24, 2005, pp. 233–254.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. S. Riedel and B. Gabrys, “Hierarchical Multilevel Approaches of Forecast Combination,” Proceedings of the OR 2004 conference, The Netherlands, 2004.

  17. S. Riedel and B. Gabrys, “Evolving Multilevel Forecast Combination Models—An Experimental Study,” Proceedings of NiSIS 2005 Symposium, Albufeira, Portugal, 2005.

  18. S. Riedel and B. Gabrys, “Adaptive Mechanisms in an Airline Ticket Demand Forecasting System,” Proceedings of the EUNITE 2003 conference, Oulu, Finland, 2003.

  19. R. Neuling, S. Riedel, and K.-U. Kalka, “New Approaches to Origin and Destination and No-show Forecasting: Excavating the Passenger Name Records Treasure,” Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, vol. 3, no. 1, 2004, pp. 62–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lufthansa Systems Berlin GmbH, Fritschstrasse 27-28, 10585, Berlin, Germany

    Silvia Riedel

  2. Computational Intelligence Research Group, School of Design, Engineering and Computing, Bournemouth University, Poole House, Talbot Campus, Poole, BH12 5BB, UK

    Silvia Riedel & Bogdan Gabrys

Authors
  1. Silvia Riedel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bogdan Gabrys
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Silvia Riedel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Riedel, S., Gabrys, B. Combination of Multi Level Forecasts. J VLSI Sign Process Syst Sign Im 49, 265–280 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11265-007-0076-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11265-007-0076-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation