Abstract
Rule-Based Forecasting (RBF) is an expert system that uses judgment to develop and apply rules for combining extrapolations. The judgment comes from two sources, forecasting expertise and domain knowledge. Forecasting expertise is based on more than a half century of research. Domain knowledge is obtained in a structured way; one example of domain knowledge is managers’ expectations about trends, which we call “causal forces.” Time series are described in terms of up to 28 conditions, which are used to assign weights to extrapolations. Empirical results on multiple sets of time series show that RBF produces more accurate forecasts than those from traditional extrapolation methods or equal-weights combined extrapolations. RBF is most useful when it is based on good domain knowledge, the domain knowledge is important, the series is well-behaved (such that patterns can be identified), there is a strong trend in the data, and the forecast horizon is long. Under ideal conditions, the error for RBF’s forecasts were one-third less than those for equal-weights combining. When these conditions are absent, RBF will neither improve nor harm forecast accuracy. Some of RBF’s rules can be used with traditional extrapolation procedures. In a series of studies, rules based on causal forces improved the selection of forecasting methods, the structuring of time series, and the assessment of prediction intervals.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Adya, M. (2000), “Corrections to rule-based forecasting: Results of a replication,” International Journal of Forecasting, 16, 125–127.
Adya, M., J. S. Armstrong, F. Collopy and M. Kennedy (2000), “An application of rule-based forecasting to a situation lacking domain knowledge,” International Journal of Forecasting, 16, 477–484.
Adya, M., J. S. Armstrong, F. Collopy and M. Kennedy (2001), “Automatic identification of time series features for rule-based forecasting,” International Journal of Forecasting, 17, 143–158.
Armstrong, J. S. (1985), Long Range Forecasting: From Crystal Ball to Computer. New York: John Wiley. Full text at hops.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast.
Armstrong, J. S. (2001a), “Evaluating forecasting methods,” in J. S. Armstrong (ed.), Principles of Forecasting. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Armstrong, J. S. (2001b), “Combining forecasts,” in J. S. Armstrong (ed.), Principles of Forecasting. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Armstrong, J. S. (2001c), “Selecting forecasting methods,” in J. S. Armstrong (ed.), Principles of Forecasting. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Armstrong, J. S. and F. Collopy (1992), “Error measures for generalizing about forecasting methods: Empirical comparisons,” International Journal of Forecasting, 8, 69–80. Full text at hops.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast.
Armstrong, J. S. and F. Collopy (1993), “Causal forces: Structuring knowledge for time series extrapolation,” Journal of Forecasting, 12, 103–115. Full text at hops.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast.
Armstrong, J. S. and F. Collopy (1998), “Integration of statistical methods and judgment for time series forecasting: Principles from empirical research,” in G. Wright and P. Goodwin (eds.), Forecasting with Judgment. New York: John Wiley, pp. 269–293. Full text at hops.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast.
Armstrong, J.S. and F. Collopy (2001), “Identification of asymmetric prediction intervals through causal forces,” Journal of Forecasting (forthcoming).
Armstrong, J. S. and E. Lusk (1983), “The accuracy of alternative extrapolation models: Analysis of a forecasting competition through open peer review,” Journal of Forecasting, 2, 259–311. Full text at hops/wharton.upenn.edu/forecast.
Ascher, W. (1978), Forecasting: An Appraisal for Policy-makers and Planners. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Assimakopoulos, V. and A. Konida (1992), “An object-oriented approach to forecasting,” International Journal of Forecasting, 8, 175–185.
Batchelor R. and P. Dua (1995), “Forecaster diversity and the benefits of combining forecasts,” Management Science, 41, 68–75.
Box, G. E. and G. M. Jenkins (1970), Time Series Analysis, Forecasting and Control. San Francisco: Holden-Day.
Bunn, D. and G. Wright (1991), “Interaction of judgmental and statistical forecasting: Issues and analysis,” Management Science, 37, 501–518
Carbone, R. and S. Makridakis (1986), “Forecasting when pattern changes occur beyond historical data,” Management Science, 32, 257–271.
Collopy, F. and J. S. Armstrong (1989), “Toward computer aided forecasting systems: Gathering, coding and validating the knowledge,” in G. R. Widmeyer (ed.), DSS Transactions. TIMS College on Information Systems. Providence, R.I, pp. 103–119. Full text at hops.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast.
Collopy, F. and J. S. Armstrong (1992), “Rule-based forecasting: Development and valida- tion of an expert systems approach to combining time series extrapolations,” Man- agement Science, 38, 1394–1414. Full text at hops.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast.
Collopy, F. and J. S. Armstrong (1996), “Decomposition by causal forces: An application to highway deaths.” Full text at hops.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast
Duncan, G., W. Gorr and J. Szczypula (2001), “Forecasting analogous time series,” in J. S. Armstrong (ed.) Principles of Forecasting. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Fildes, R., M. Hibon, S. Makridakis and N. Meade (1998), “Generalizing about univariate forecasting methods: Further empirical evidence,” International Journal of Forecasting, 14, 339–358. (Commentaries follow on pp. 359–366.)
Gardner, E. S., Jr. (1999), “Rule-based forecasting vs. damped-trend exponential smoothing,” Management Science, 45, 1169–1176.
Harvey, N. (2001), “Improving judgmental forecasts,” in J. S. Armstrong (ed.), Principles of Forecasting. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Hooke, R. and T. A. Jeeves (1961), “Direct search solution of numerical and statistical problems,” Journal of the ACM, 8, 212–229.
MacGregor, D. G. (2001), “Decomposition for judgmental forecasting and estimation,” in J. S. Armstrong (ed.), Principles of Forecasting. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Makridakis, S., A. Andersen, R. Carbone, R. Fildes, M. Hibon, R. Lewandowski, J. Newton, E. Parzen and R. Winkler (1982), “The accuracy of extrapolation (time series) methods: Results of a forecasting competition,” Journal of Forecasting, 1, 111–153.
Makridakis, S. and M. Hibon (2000), “The M3-Competition: Results, conclusions and implications,” International Journal of Forecasting, 16, 451–476.
Schnaars, S. (1984), “Situational factors affecting forecast accuracy,” Journal of Marketing Research, 21, 290–297.
Stewart, T. (2001), “Improving reliability of judgmental forecasts,” in J. S. Armstrong (ed.), Principles of Forecasting. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Tashman, L. J. and J. M. Kruk (1996), “The use of protocols to select exponential smoothing procedures: A reconsideration of forecasting competitions,” International Journal of Forecasting, 12, 235–253.
Tierney, J. (1990), `Betting the planet,“ New York Times Magazine, December 2, p. 52.
Vokurka, R. J., B. E. Flores and S. L. Pearce (1996), “Automatic feature identification and graphical support in rule-based forecasting: A comparison,” International Journal of Forecasting, 12, 495–512.
Webby, R., M. O’Connor and M. Lawrence (2001), “Judgmental time-series forecasting using domain knowledge,” in J. S. Armstrong (ed.), Principles of Forecasting. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Armstrong, J.S., Adya, M., Collopy, F. (2001). Rule-Based Forecasting: Using Judgment in Time-Series Extrapolation. In: Armstrong, J.S. (eds) Principles of Forecasting. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 30. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-47630-3_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-47630-3_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-7401-5
Online ISBN: 978-0-306-47630-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive