Closed Alexej36 closed 6 years ago
1 & 2 were, sadly, a bug. Now fixed in https://github.com/robjhyndman/forecast/commit/50196ebda043dab176ea677060a9659d502cbf4c
I think 3. is just two different estimates of the slope based on different optimization criteria.
Not sure about 4. Will take a look.
This yielded some pretty dramatic results in forecast v7.3:
library(forecast)
packageVersion('forecast')
Y <- c(1.060283, 1.009953, 20.183244, 8.032572, 10.408715)
y <- ts(Y)
plot(y)
mdl <- tbats(y)
pred <- predict(mdl)
pred
plot(pred)
Attached is a PDF showing the results tbats_bug_7_3.pdf
This is not a bug. It's just a bad model obtained from 5 observations.
Rob, thank you for the quick reply. Agreed that the sample size is too small for a good model- I’m mass producing forecasts daily and there are a variety of series inputs in terms of length and behavior. Right now I'm exploring alternate forecasts using various methods and I was looking for one to serve as a “one-stop shop” that would produce models as good as the input data for each series, with more conservative forecasts for shorter/wilder series. Is there a better alternative to TBATS in that case? Apart from doing my own if-then on algorithm selection based on the input series, or using hierarchical time series which I suppose might help?
Thank you!
ets
is pretty good provided you have non-seasonal data, or seasonal data with one type of seasonality and seasonal frequency no more than 24. It is also much faster than tbats
.
Issue 4 in the original bug report appears to behave better now.
While working with bats/tbats models, I found some strange behavior I want to report.
My understanding of bats/tbats is the following:
Based on my understanding (1.-3.) there are 4 issues I want to clarify: