Cited by 15Forecasting Techniques and ApplicationsStatistical and numerical algorithmsStatistical Methods and Applications

Prediction with a generalized cost of error function

Clive W. J. Granger·2001·Essays in Econometrics

Abstract

Classical prediction theory limits itself to quadratic cost functions, and hence least-square predictors. However, the cost functions that arise in practice in economics and management situations are not likely to be quadratic in form, and frequently will be non-symmetric. It is the object of this paper to throw light on prediction in such situations and to suggest some practical implications. It is suggested that a useful, although suboptimal, manner of taking into account generalized cost functions is to add a constant bias term to the predictor. Two theorems are proved showing that under fairly general conditions the bias term can be taken to be zero when one uses a symmetric cost function. If the cost function is a non-symmetric linear function, an expression for the bias can be simply obtained. INTRODUCTION Suppose that one predicts some stochastic process and that it is subsequently found that an error of size x has been made. With such an error one can usually determine the cost of having made the error and the amount of this cost will usually increase as the magnitude of the error increases. Let g(x) represent the cost of error function. In both the classical theory of statistical prediction and in practice, this function is usually taken to be of the form g(x) = cx 2 , so that least-squares predictors are considered. However, in the fields of economics and management an assumption that the cost of error function is proportional to x 2 is not particularly realistic.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/cbo9780511753961.019

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Granger, C. W. J.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Clive W. J. Granger
Venue
Essays in Econometrics
Published
2001-07-23
Pages
366-374
OpenAlex
W2292360095
Cited by
15
References
0
Citations by year
2018: 1 · 2014: 2
FWCI
3.10
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Forecasting Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Applied Mathematics › Statistical and numerical algorithms
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
Keywords
prediction theory, asymmetric loss functions, bias term, linear cost functions, probabilistic forecasting

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review