Date of this Version
International Journal of Forecasting
We agree with most of what the commentators say about Armstrong and Collopy (1992), hereafter referred to as "AC," and Fildes (1992), hereafter referred to as "F." Here, we address three issues where we do not agree entirely:
(1) Can the results from the M-competition be generalized?
(2) Is Theil's U2 easy to communicate?
(3) Would a richer set of measures lead to improvements in the selection and development of forecasting methods?
Our own answers to these questions are "yes," "no," and "probably not," respectively.
Originally published in the International Journal of Forecasting © 1992 Elsevier
This is a pre-publication version. The final version is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0169-2070(92)90015-2
Collopy, F., & Armstrong, J. S. (1992). Generalization and Communication Issues in the Use of Error Measures: A Reply. International Journal of Forecasting, 8 (1), 107-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0169-2070(92)90015-2
Business Administration, Management, and Operations Commons, Business Analytics Commons, Business Intelligence Commons, Management Sciences and Quantitative Methods Commons, Marketing Commons, Organizational Behavior and Theory Commons
Date Posted: 15 June 2018
This document has been peer reviewed.