Classifying forecasting methods as being either of a "machine learning" or "statistical" nature has become commonplace in parts of the forecasting literature and community, as exemplified by the M4 competition and the conclusion drawn by the organizers. We argue that this distinction does not stem from fundamental differences in the methods assigned to either class. Instead, this distinction is probably of a tribal nature, which limits the insights into the appropriateness and effectiveness of different forecasting methods. We provide alternative characteristics of forecasting methods which, in our view, allow to draw meaningful conclusions. Further, we discuss areas of forecasting which could benefit most from cross-pollination between the ML and the statistics communities.
翻译:将预测方法归类为“机械学习”或“统计”性质,在预测文献和社区的某些部分已变得司空见惯,例如M4竞争和组织者得出的结论。我们争辩说,这种区分并非出自为任一类别分配的方法的根本差异。相反,这种区分可能是部落性的,限制了对不同预测方法是否适当和有效的认识。我们提供了预测方法的替代特征,我们认为这些特征可以得出有意义的结论。此外,我们讨论的预测领域最可能受益于ML和统计界之间的交叉污染。