Claim C6 · interpretive · entrylib:2026.000001@v3 · 2026-11-10

Corrected · 10 November 2026 at 13:47 UTC

The test quantities of the claims bound result entries that version 2 had turned into table cells; they now bind the cells, which keep the full precision the verdicts were computed at, and each table names the CSV of the lab results (A10) as its source. The defining equations of D1, D4, D11 and D13 are set as displayed equations.

By Ivan Svetunkov (ORCID 0000-0001-7826-0281)

Calibration of the prediction intervals of AutoMSARIMA in smooth on M1, M3, Tourism and M4 · C6

Principal claim C6 of this claimset (Svetunkov, I. (guarantor), 2026), with what it rests on. Read the whole claimset.

Copies a message for ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini: paste it there.

The message

Read https://entrylib.org/p/2026.000001/C6, one claim of a research paper with the evidence it rests on. Tell me briefly what it says and how well it is supported. If you cannot open the link, tell me instead of guessing. Then wait for my questions.

The claim

60C6 · interpretive · novelty: new, by the authors · no close match on EntryLib

The wider intervals of ETS than of AutoMSARIMA on the benchmark come from the multiplicative-error models in the ETS pool of ETS forced and selected, not from how either package computes the interval.

Claims it rests on

95C10 · descriptive · novelty: new, by the authors

On the 114 benchmark series where the selected ETS(ANN) of ETS forced and selected and the ARIMA(0,1,1) selected by AutoMSARIMA give the same forecast and width, the two have the same 80% coverage, 0.734.

100C11 · descriptive · novelty: new, by the authors

Forced on all 5,315 benchmark series, ETS(MNN) of ETS forced and selected has an 80% coverage of 0.764, against 0.668 for ETS(ANN) and 0.695 for ARIMA(0,1,1).

Evidence

E13 · quant · benchmark · cited by C10

Coverage by level terciles on the 5,315 benchmark series for AutoMSARIMA with backcasting (refitted) and for the other ARIMA implementations (saved forecasts of the smooth benchmark of 2026-11-05); and coverage of ETS and ARIMA on the series where the selected ETS(ANN) of ETS forced and selected and the selected ARIMA(0,1,1) give the same forecast and width (exploratory run RN15).

E13.T1 · 80% coverage by level tercile of AutoMSARIMA and the other ARIMA implementations on the benchmark (data: benchmark)
Rowmethodcoverage (nominal level: 0.8, level terciles: low)coverage (nominal level: 0.8, level terciles: mid)coverage (nominal level: 0.8, level terciles: high)
r1AutoMSARIMA0.78620.66770.5897
r2statsforecast AutoARIMA0.78910.66720.5893
r3pmdarima auto_arima0.77020.63540.5825
r4skforecast Arima0.78090.65780.5854
E13.T2 · Series of the benchmark where the selected ETS(ANN) and the selected ARIMA(0,1,1) give the same forecast and width (data: benchmark)
Rowmethodseriescoverage (nominal level: 0.8)
r1both114
r2ETS0.7336
r3ARIMA0.7336

E14 · quant · benchmark · cited by C11

ETS forced and selected and ARIMA(0,1,1) forced on all 5,315 benchmark series and the selected ETS and AutoMSARIMA models, backcasting; cov80 per method (exploratory run RN14 on the forecasts of RN13).

E14.T1 · 80% coverage of forced and selected models on all 5,315 benchmark series, backcasting (data: benchmark)
Rowmethodcoverage (nominal level: 0.8)
r1ARIMA(0,1,1)0.6951
r2ETS(ANN)0.6681
r3ETS(MNN)0.7635
r4ETS, selected0.7492
r5ARIMA, selected0.6812

W1 · argument · abductive · premises C10, C11

Where ETS and ARIMA reduce to the same model, their intervals coincide and cover the same share (C17), so the interval computations agree; the additive ETS(ANN) forced on every series covers no more than ARIMA(0,1,1), while the multiplicative ETS(MNN) covers 0.07 to 0.10 more (C22). The difference between the pools is therefore the multiplicative-error models, which AutoMSARIMA does not have.

Limitations

L7 · sample size · reduces precision · affects C10 · mitigation: none

The series where the selected ETS(ANN) and ARIMA(0,1,1) give the same forecast and width are 114 of 5,315.

Definitions

Methods 4

D1 MSARIMA analytic interval: The quantiles of predict(interval="prediction") of a pure ARIMA in smooth 1.3.0, which dispatches to the approximate interval. The ARIMA is the state space model yt=w⊤vt−l+ϵt,vt=Fvt−l+gϵt,ϵt∼N(0,σ2).\begin{aligned} y_t &= w^\top v_{t-l} + \epsilon_t, \\ v_t &= F v_{t-l} + g \epsilon_t, \\ \epsilon_t &\sim N(0, \sigma^2). \end{aligned} The quantile at level τ\tau and horizon hh is qτ,h=y^T+h|T+Φ−1(τ)Vh,Vh=σ^2TT−kch,q_{\tau,h} = \hat y_{T+h|T} + \Phi^{-1}(\tau) \sqrt{V_h}, \qquad V_h = \hat\sigma^2 \frac{T}{T-k} c_h, with σ^2=1T∑t=1Tet2,ch=1+∑j=1h−1(w⊤Fj−1g)2,\hat\sigma^2 = \frac{1}{T} \sum_{t=1}^{T} e_t^2, \qquad c_h = 1 + \sum_{j=1}^{h-1} \left(w^\top F^{j-1} g\right)^2, where kk is the number of estimated parameters and chc_h the hh-th diagonal element of the analytic covariance of the state space model, written here for a model with lag 1. Source: Svetunkov (2023).

D10 AutoMSARIMA: AutoMSARIMA(lags, initial) in Python and auto.msarima() in R of smooth 1.3.0 / 4.6: ARIMA orders up to AR (3,3), I (2,1), MA (3,3) and a constant selected by AICc, normal errors, the MSARIMA analytic interval for the quantiles. Backcasting initial states unless stated. Source: Svetunkov (2023).

D15 ETS forced and selected: ETS of smooth with backcasting: AutoADAM-style selection among ETS models (ES(model="ZXZ"), or ZXN for non-seasonal series), or ETS(ANN) or ETS(MNN) fitted to every series. Source: Svetunkov (2023).

D16 other ARIMA implementations: statsforecast AutoARIMA, pmdarima auto_arima and skforecast Arima, as run in the notebook of the smooth benchmark of 2026-11-05, whose saved forecasts were read.

Data 4

D5 benchmark: The 5,315 series of M1 (1,001), M3 (3,003) and Tourism (1,311) from fcompdata 0.1.4, with their own holdouts and seasonal periods; lags (1,m)(1, m) for seasonal series. Members: D18, D19, D20.

D18 M1: The 1,001 series of the M1 competition with their holdouts. Source: Makridakis et al. (1982).

D19 M3: The 3,003 series of the M3 competition with their holdouts. Source: Makridakis and Hibon (2000).

D20 Tourism: The 1,311 series of the tourism forecasting competition with their holdouts. Source: Athanasopoulos et al. (2011).

Variables and measures 2

D4 coverage: For the quantile qτ,jq_{\tau,j} at level τ\tau and horizon jj, the share of holdout observations at or below it, cτ=1h∑j=1h1(yT+j≤qτ,j),c_\tau = \frac{1}{h} \sum_{j=1}^{h} 1\left(y_{T+j} \le q_{\tau,j}\right), averaged first within a series and then over series. cov80 is c0.9−c0.1c_{0.9} - c_{0.1}, the coverage of the central 80% interval; q50 is c0.5c_{0.5}.

D17 level ratio: Mean of the last third of the in-sample data of a series divided by the mean of all its in-sample data.

Study design 1

D7 level terciles: Series split into terciles of the level ratio across the series of a data set; cov80 reported for each tercile, and the spread as the largest minus the smallest of the three.

References

  1. Makridakis et al. (1982) Makridakis, S., Andersen, A., Carbone, R., Fildes, R., Hibon, M., Lewandowski, R., Newton, J., Parzen, E., & Winkler, R. (1982). The accuracy of extrapolation (time series) methods: Results of a forecasting competition. Journal of Forecasting, 1(2), 111–153. doi:10.1002/for.3980010202 Used by: D18
  2. Makridakis and Hibon (2000) Makridakis, S., & Hibon, M. (2000). The M3-Competition: results, conclusions and implications. International Journal of Forecasting, 16(4), 451–476. doi:10.1016/S0169-2070(00)00057-1 Used by: D19
  3. Athanasopoulos et al. (2011) Athanasopoulos, G., Hyndman, R. J., Song, H., & Wu, D. C. (2011). The tourism forecasting competition. International Journal of Forecasting, 27(3), 822–844. doi:10.1016/j.ijforecast.2010.04.009 Used by: D20
  4. Svetunkov (2023) Svetunkov, I. (2023). Forecasting and Analytics with the Augmented Dynamic Adaptive Model (ADAM). Chapman and Hall/CRC. doi:10.1201/9781003452652 Used by: D1, D10, D15

Artefacts

Score

Scores are computed by rules from the claimset file (EntryLib rubric 0.2): they check the record, not the science, and may change as the rubric and reviews develop. The rubric.

C6: 60, Medium

Novelty: new, by the authors · no close match on EntryLib

  1. −30 Support Rests on argument only. To remove it: Support the claim with evidence the claimset records, or have its proof checked.
  2. −5 Open problems Limitation L7 (reduces precision, not mitigated): The series where the selected ETS(ANN) and ARIMA(0,1,1) give the same forecast and width are 114 of 5,315. To remove it: Mitigate it with evidence, or narrow the claim's scope so that it no longer applies.
  3. −5 Context A principal claim related to no earlier work. To remove it: Relate the claim to the earlier work it extends, addresses or departs from.

C10: 95, High

Novelty: new, by the authors

  1. −5 Open problems Limitation L7 (reduces precision, not mitigated): The series where the selected ETS(ANN) and ARIMA(0,1,1) give the same forecast and width are 114 of 5,315. To remove it: Mitigate it with evidence, or narrow the claim's scope so that it no longer applies.

C11: 100, High

Novelty: new, by the authors

Nothing lost.