Assessing and Comparing Fixed-Target Forecasts of Arctic Sea Ice: Glide Charts for Feature-Engineered Linear Regression and Machine Learning Models
Francis X. Diebold; Maximilian Goebel; Philippe Goulet Coulombe · 2022 · arXiv
WASTE classifies this as Negative / Null Result Report · AI classification, approximate
The study found no significant effect — useful as a negative control or null benchmark for your own design.
Abstract (excerpt)
We use "glide charts" (plots of sequences of root mean squared forecast errors as the target date is approached) to evaluate and compare fixed-target forecasts of Arctic sea ice. We first use them to evaluate the simple feature-engineered linear regression (FELR) forecasts of Diebold and Goebel (2021), and to compare FELR forecasts to naive pure-trend benchmark forecasts. Then we introduce a much more sophisticated feature-engineered machine learning (FEML) model, and we use glide charts to evaluate FEML forecasts and compare them to a FELR benchmark. Our substantive results include the freque
Excerpt shown for reference under fair use — read the full paper at the publisher.
About to run something similar?
Run an AI Precheck on your own design to catch failure modes like this one before you spend the time. Your first desk check is free.
Related failures
The Oregon Experiment — Effects of Medicaid on Clinical Outcomes
Negative / Null Result ReportMicrocredit in Theory and Practice: Using Randomized Credit Scoring for Impact Evaluation
Negative / Null Result ReportThe Cost of Carbon: Capital Market Effects of the Proposed Emission Trading Scheme (ETS)
Negative / Null Result ReportPushing on a string: US monetary policy is less powerful in recessions ∗
Negative / Null Result ReportThe Evidence on Globalisation
Negative / Null Result ReportStatistical tests for power-law cross-correlated processes
WASTE indexes this work — it does not host or republish it. Failure-type classification is automated and approximate.
Metadata source: arXiv