IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2406.13749.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Combining Combined Forecasts: a Network Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Marcos R. Fernandes

Abstract

This study investigates the practice of experts aggregating forecasts before informing a decision-maker. The significance of this subject extends to various contexts where experts inform their assessments to a decision-maker following discussions with peers. My findings show that, irrespective of the information structure, aggregation rules introduce no bias to decision-making in expected terms. Nevertheless, the concern revolves around variance. In situations where experts are equally precise, and pair-wise correlation of forecasts is the same across all pairs of experts, the network structure plays a pivotal role in decision-making variance. For classical structures, I show that star networks exhibit the highest variance, contrasting with $d$-regular networks that achieve zero variance, emphasizing their efficiency. Additionally, by employing the Poisson random graph model under the assumptions of a large network size and a small connection probability, the results indicate that both the expected Network Bias and its variance converge to zero as the network size becomes sufficiently large. These insights enhance the understanding of decision-making under different information, network structures and aggregation rules. They enrich the literature on combining forecasts by exploring the effects of prior network communication on decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcos R. Fernandes, 2024. "Combining Combined Forecasts: a Network Approach," Papers 2406.13749, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2406.13749
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2406.13749
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rainer Hegselmann & Ulrich Krause, 2002. "Opinion Dynamics and Bounded Confidence Models, Analysis and Simulation," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 5(3), pages 1-2.
    2. T Renee Bowen & Danil Dmitriev & Simone Galperti, 2023. "Learning from Shared News: When Abundant Information Leads to Belief Polarization," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(2), pages 955-1000.
    3. Robert L. Winkler, 1981. "Combining Probability Distributions from Dependent Information Sources," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 479-488, April.
    4. Hsiao, Cheng & Wan, Shui Ki, 2014. "Is there an optimal forecast combination?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 178(P2), pages 294-309.
    5. Levy, Gilat & Razin, Ronny, 2021. "A maximum likelihood approach to combining forecasts," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 104116, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Hirshleifer, David & Welch, Ivo, 1992. "A Theory of Fads, Fashion, Custom, and Cultural Change in Informational Cascades," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(5), pages 992-1026, October.
    7. Genre, Véronique & Kenny, Geoff & Meyler, Aidan & Timmermann, Allan, 2013. "Combining expert forecasts: Can anything beat the simple average?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 108-121.
    8. Levy, Gilat & Razin, Ronny, 2021. "A Maximum Likelihood Approach to Combining Forecasts," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(1), January.
    9. Joseph Lipscomb & Giovanni Parmigiani & Vic Hasselblad, 1998. "Combining Expert Judgment by Hierarchical Modeling: An Application to Physician Staffing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(2), pages 149-161, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang, Xiaoqian & Hyndman, Rob J. & Li, Feng & Kang, Yanfei, 2023. "Forecast combinations: An over 50-year review," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 1518-1547.
    2. Buechel, Berno & Hellmann, Tim & Klößner, Stefan, 2015. "Opinion dynamics and wisdom under conformity," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 240-257.
    3. Rusinowska, Agnieszka & Taalaibekova, Akylai, 2019. "Opinion formation and targeting when persuaders have extreme and centrist opinions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 9-27.
    4. Mauro Costantini & Ulrich Gunter & Robert M. Kunst, 2017. "Forecast Combinations in a DSGE‐VAR Lab," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(3), pages 305-324, April.
    5. Jing Zeng, 2015. "Combining Country-Specific Forecasts when Forecasting Euro Area Macroeconomic Aggregates," Working Paper Series of the Department of Economics, University of Konstanz 2015-11, Department of Economics, University of Konstanz.
    6. Wei Qian & Craig A. Rolling & Gang Cheng & Yuhong Yang, 2015. "On the Forecast Combination Puzzle," Papers 1505.00475, arXiv.org.
    7. Hannah Ãœbler & Stephan Hartmann, 2016. "Simulating Trends in Artificial Influence Networks," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 19(1), pages 1-2.
    8. Jason R. W. Merrick, 2008. "Getting the Right Mix of Experts," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 43-52, March.
    9. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2020. "A Survey on Nonstrategic Models of Opinion Dynamics," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-29, December.
    10. Ulrich Gunter, 2021. "Improving Hotel Room Demand Forecasts for Vienna across Hotel Classes and Forecast Horizons: Single Models and Combination Techniques Based on Encompassing Tests," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-36, November.
    11. Michel Grabisch & Antoine Mandel & Agnieszka Rusinowska & Emily Tanimura, 2015. "Strategic influence in social networks," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01158168, HAL.
    12. Battiston, Pietro & Stanca, Luca, 2015. "Boundedly rational opinion dynamics in social networks: Does indegree matter?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 400-421.
    13. Benjamin Cabrera & Björn Ross & Daniel Röchert & Felix Brünker & Stefan Stieglitz, 2021. "The influence of community structure on opinion expression: an agent-based model," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(9), pages 1331-1355, November.
    14. Muhammad Umar B. Niazi & A. Bülent Özgüler, 2021. "A Differential Game Model of Opinion Dynamics: Accord and Discord as Nash Equilibria," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 137-160, March.
    15. Pedraza, Lucía & Pinasco, Juan Pablo & Saintier, Nicolas & Balenzuela, Pablo, 2021. "An analytical formulation for multidimensional continuous opinion models," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    16. Tao Lin & Yiling Chen, 2022. "Sample Complexity of Forecast Aggregation," Papers 2207.13126, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    17. Esteban Fernández-Vázquez & Blanca Moreno, 2017. "Entropy Econometrics for combining regional economic forecasts: A Data-Weighted Prior Estimator," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 349-370, October.
    18. Kfir Eliaz & Simone Galperti & Ran Spiegler, 2022. "False Narratives and Political Mobilization," Papers 2206.12621, arXiv.org.
    19. Wei Qian & Craig A. Rolling & Gang Cheng & Yuhong Yang, 2019. "On the Forecast Combination Puzzle," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-26, September.
    20. Yanwei Jia & Jussi Keppo & Ville Satopää, 2023. "Herding in Probabilistic Forecasts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 2713-2732, May.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2406.13749. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.