Combining Forecasts from Linear and Nonlinear Models Using Sophisticated Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims at improving the prediction accuracy through using combining forecasts approaches. In forecast combination, the crucial issue is the selection of the weights to be assigned to each model. In addition to traditional methods, we propose, also, two sophisticated approaches. These suggested methods are modified Bayesian Moving Average (BMA) and Extended Time-varying coefficient (ETVC). The first technique is based on merging the traditional BMA with other frequentist combination schemes to avoid the subjective prior inside the traditional Bayesian technique. The suggested ETVC approach provides consistent time-varying parameters even if there are some measurement errors, omitted variables bias and if the true functional form is unknown. Concerning the included models, we consider both linear and nonlinear models in order to calculate the forecasts of quarterly Egyptian CPI inflation. We find that our proposed scheme ETVC is superior to the best model and all other static combination schemes including the time-varying scheme based on the random walk coefficients updated (TVR) approach. Additionally, the suggested modified Bayesian approach improves the traditional BMA and overcomes the problem of depending on the arbitrary choice for the initial priors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".