The claim
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.
Scope: data: M1, M3 and Tourism series; conditions: backcasting · Argument: W1 · Uses: C10, C11
Claims it rests on
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.
Scope: data: M1, M3 and Tourism series; conditions: backcasting · Data: E13 (T2.r1, T2.r2, T2.r3) · Limitations: L7 · Used by: C6
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).
Scope: data: M1, M3 and Tourism series; conditions: backcasting · Data: E14 (T1.r3, T1.r2, T1.r1) · Used by: C6
Evidence
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).
Setup: studied AutoMSARIMA, other ARIMA implementations, ETS forced and selected · cases benchmark · procedure level terciles · lens coverage, level ratio
| Row | method | coverage (nominal level: 0.8, level terciles: low) | coverage (nominal level: 0.8, level terciles: mid) | coverage (nominal level: 0.8, level terciles: high) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| r1 | AutoMSARIMA | 0.7862 | 0.6677 | 0.5897 |
| r2 | statsforecast AutoARIMA | 0.7891 | 0.6672 | 0.5893 |
| r3 | pmdarima auto_arima | 0.7702 | 0.6354 | 0.5825 |
| r4 | skforecast Arima | 0.7809 | 0.6578 | 0.5854 |
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).
Setup: studied ETS forced and selected, AutoMSARIMA · cases benchmark · lens coverage
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
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
The quantile at level and horizon is
with
where is the number of estimated parameters and the -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 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 at level and horizon , the share of holdout observations at or below it, averaged first within a series and then over series. cov80 is , the coverage of the central 80% interval; q50 is .
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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- A7 · lab_record Lab record of the study (branch claimset/msarima-interval-calibration): questions, hypotheses, plans, approvals, runs, results and notes as an append-only, hash-chained event log (lab record 0.20, claimset 0.39.0).
- A10 · data Every result recorded in the lab record (A7), one row per result: the lab result ID, the run that produced it, the quantity as the analysis script names it, its conditions as JSON and its full-precision value. The tables of the evidence objects hold these values rounded to four significant digits and at least four decimals.
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
- −30 Support Rests on argument only. To remove it: Support the claim with evidence the claimset records, or have its proof checked.
- −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.
- −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
- −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.