4.7 Article

Performance of state space and ARIMA models for consumer retail sales forecasting

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rcim.2014.12.015

关键词

Aggregate retail sales; Forecast accuracy; State space models; ARIMA models

资金

  1. North Portugal Regional Operational Programme (ON.2 - O Novo Norte), under the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF), through the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) [NORTE-07-0124-FEDER-000057]
  2. Portuguese Funding Agency, Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia (FCT)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Forecasting future sales is one of the most important issues that is beyond all strategic and planning decisions in effective operations of retail businesses. For profitable retail businesses, accurate demand forecasting is crucial in organizing and planning production, purchasing, transportation and labor force. Retail sales series belong to a special type of time series that typically contain trend and seasonal patterns, presenting challenges in developing effective forecasting models. This work compares the forecasting performance of state space models and ARIMA models. The forecasting performance is demonstrated through a case study of retail sales of five different categories of women footwear: Boots, Booties, Flats, Sandals and Shoes. On both methodologies the model with the minimum value of Akaike's Information Criteria for the in-sample period was selected from all admissible models for further evaluation in the out-of-sample. Both one-step and multiple-step forecasts were produced. The results show that when an automatic algorithm the overall out-of-sample forecasting performance of state space and ARIMA models evaluated via RMSE, MAE and MAPE is quite similar on both one-step and multi-step forecasts. We also conclude that state space and ARIMA produce coverage probabilities that are close to the nominal rates for both one-step and multi-step forecasts. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据