Talk:Forecasting/Archives/2012

Proposal to merge with Predictive analytics

For a discussion about merging with Predictive analytics, see talk:Predictive analytics#Merge with forecasting Apdevries 05:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Merge tag removed. Se discussion in "Predicitve analytics."CommodiCast 15:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

what is forecasting —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.124.125 (talk) 14:16, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Software for forecasting

There are dozens of programs that can do forecasts. It would be nice to have a seperate article that compared their various methods used etc. Some are purpose built, others include forecasting among other statistical things. Some are free, others commercial. A few do forecasting automatically.

Off the top of my head ones I recall include Autobox, Forecast Pro, R, Gretl, Easyreg, and dozens of others. 80.1.88.54 21:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

forcasting is some prediction ,which is done to pridict some activity... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.200.130.10 (talk) 09:48, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

"Econometric" methods

It seems that people involved in forecasting sometimes use the term "econometric model" as roughly synonymous with models of causation. In economics, the term is used somewhat more broadly, I think, as the application of statistical methods to economics. Regardless of the appropriate use of the term, it makes no sense to have it nestled between regression and ARIMAX as an example of a "causal/econometric" method. Might as well have "statistics" listed. --Sjsilverman (talk) 23:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Factual conflict

There is a factual conflict between two Wikipedia articles on forecasting.

Forecasting accuracy (this article): "Forecasting accuracy, in contrary to belief, cannot be increased by the addition of experts in the subject area relevant to the phenomenon to be forecast."

Weather_forecasting#Nowcasting: "A human given the latest radar, satellite and observational data will be able to make a better analysis of the small scale features present and so will be able to make a more accurate forecast for the following few hours."

Both statements cite references. I believe that weather forecasting provides an exception to the general rule (which is thus not always true). Given that the public is exposed weather forecasts every day, I believe that this is the article to be clarified.159.83.196.1 (talk) 23:45, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

The first (this) article is talking about adding more "experts". The second (weather forecasting) is talking about a comparison of a computer moded operating at a coarse time/space resolution (and unable to make use of everything that is known) with what can be done by an expert (or more realistically, a better computer model) who is able to make use of everthing that is known. Thus adding more information on which to base foreasts is useful, adding more experts is not (if you believe the source cited). Melcombe (talk) 12:30, 18 February 2012 (UTC)