Paper detail

Proper scoring rules for evaluating asymmetry in density forecasting

This paper proposes a novel asymmetric continuous probabilistic score (ACPS) for evaluating and comparing density forecasts. It extends the proposed score and defines a weighted version, which emphasizes regions of interest, such as the tails or the center of a variable's range. A test is also introduced to statistically compare the predictive ability of different forecasts. The ACPS is of general use in any situation where the decision maker has asymmetric preferences in the evaluation of the forecasts. In an artificial experiment, the implications of varying the level of asymmetry in the ACPS are illustrated. Then, the proposed score and test are applied to assess and compare density forecasts of macroeconomic relevant datasets (US employment growth) and of commodity prices (oil and electricity prices) with particular focus on the recent COVID-19 crisis period.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.