Geographical and Temporal Hierarchical Forecasting on Australian Tourism DataIn many applications, a set of time series is hierarchically organized. Examples include the presence of geographic levels, products, or categories that define different types of aggregations. In such scenarios, forecasters are often required to provide predictions for all disaggregate and aggregate series. A natural desire is for those predictions to be “coherent”, that is, for the bottom series to add up precisely to the forecasts of the aggregated series. In this notebook we present an example on how to use
HierarchicalForecast to produce coherent forecasts between both
geographical levels and temporal levels. We will use the classic
Australian Domestic Tourism (Tourism) dataset, which contains monthly
time series of the number of visitors to each state of Australia.
We will first load the Tourism data and produce base forecasts using
an AutoETS model from StatsForecast. Then, we reconciliate the
forecasts with several reconciliation algorithms from
HierarchicalForecast according to the cross-sectional geographical
hierarchies. Finally, we reconciliate the forecasts in the temporal
dimension according to a temporal hierarchy.
You can run these experiments using CPU or GPU with Google Colab.
1. Load and Process Data
In this example we will use the Tourism dataset from the Forecasting: Principles and Practice book. The dataset only contains the time series at the lowest level, so we need to create the time series for all hierarchies.| Country | Region | State | Purpose | ds | y | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Australia | Adelaide | South Australia | Business | 1998-01-01 | 135.077690 |
| 1 | Australia | Adelaide | South Australia | Business | 1998-04-01 | 109.987316 |
| 2 | Australia | Adelaide | South Australia | Business | 1998-07-01 | 166.034687 |
| 3 | Australia | Adelaide | South Australia | Business | 1998-10-01 | 127.160464 |
| 4 | Australia | Adelaide | South Australia | Business | 1999-01-01 | 137.448533 |
2. Cross-sectional reconciliation
2a. Aggregating the dataset according to cross-sectional hierarchy
The dataset can be grouped in the following non-strictly hierarchical structure.aggregate function from HierarchicalForecast we can get
the full set of time series.
| unique_id | ds | y | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Australia | 1998-01-01 | 23182.197269 |
| 1 | Australia | 1998-04-01 | 20323.380067 |
| 2 | Australia | 1998-07-01 | 19826.640511 |
| 3 | Australia | 1998-10-01 | 20830.129891 |
| 4 | Australia | 1999-01-01 | 22087.353380 |
| … | … | … | … |
| 33995 | Australia/Western Australia/Experience Perth/V… | 2016-10-01 | 439.699451 |
| 33996 | Australia/Western Australia/Experience Perth/V… | 2017-01-01 | 356.867038 |
| 33997 | Australia/Western Australia/Experience Perth/V… | 2017-04-01 | 302.296119 |
| 33998 | Australia/Western Australia/Experience Perth/V… | 2017-07-01 | 373.442070 |
| 33999 | Australia/Western Australia/Experience Perth/V… | 2017-10-01 | 455.316702 |
| unique_id | Australia/ACT/Canberra/Business | Australia/ACT/Canberra/Holiday | Australia/ACT/Canberra/Other | Australia/ACT/Canberra/Visiting | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Australia | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 1 | Australia/ACT | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 2 | Australia/New South Wales | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 3 | Australia/Northern Territory | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 4 | Australia/Queensland | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
2b. Split Train/Test sets
We use the final two years (8 quarters) as test set. Consequently, our forecast horizon=8.2c. Computing base forecasts
The following cell computes the base forecasts for each time series inY_df using the AutoETS model. Observe that Y_hat_df contains
the forecasts but they are not coherent.
2d. Reconcile forecasts
The following cell makes the previous forecasts coherent using theHierarchicalReconciliation class. Since the hierarchy structure is not
strict, we can’t use methods such as TopDown or MiddleOut. In this
example we use BottomUp and MinTrace.
Y_rec_df contains the reconciled forecasts.
| unique_id | ds | AutoETS | AutoETS/BottomUp | AutoETS/MinTrace_method-mint_shrink | AutoETS/MinTrace_method-ols | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Australia | 2016-01-01 | 25990.068004 | 24381.911737 | 25428.089783 | 25894.399067 |
| 1 | Australia | 2016-04-01 | 24458.490282 | 22903.895964 | 23914.271400 | 24357.301898 |
| 2 | Australia | 2016-07-01 | 23974.055984 | 22412.265739 | 23428.462394 | 23865.910647 |
| 3 | Australia | 2016-10-01 | 24563.454495 | 23127.349578 | 24089.845955 | 24470.782393 |
| 4 | Australia | 2017-01-01 | 25990.068004 | 24518.118006 | 25545.358678 | 25901.362283 |
3. Temporal reconciliation
Next, we aim to reconcile our forecasts also in the temporal domain.3a. Aggregating the dataset according to temporal hierarchy
We first define the temporal aggregation spec. The spec is a dictionary in which the keys are the name of the aggregation and the value is the amount of bottom-level timesteps that should be aggregated in that aggregation. For example,year consists of 12 months, so we define a
key, value pair "yearly":12. We can do something similar for other
aggregations that we are interested in.
In this example, we choose a temporal aggregation of year,
semiannual and quarter. The bottom level timesteps have a quarterly
frequency.
aggregate_temporal function. Note that we have different aggregation
matrices S for the train- and test set, as the test set contains
temporal hierarchies that are not included in the train set.
| temporal_id | quarter-1 | quarter-2 | quarter-3 | quarter-4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | year-1 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 1 | year-2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 2 | year-3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 3 | year-4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 4 | year-5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| temporal_id | quarter-1 | quarter-2 | quarter-3 | quarter-4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | year-1 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 1 | year-2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 2 | semiannual-1 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 3 | semiannual-2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 4 | semiannual-3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
make_future_dataframe helper function for that.
Y_test_df_te_new can be then used in aggregate_temporal to construct
the temporally aggregated structures:
Y_test_df_te_new doesn’t contain the ground truth values
y.
| temporal_id | unique_id | ds | y | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | year-1 | Australia | 2016-10-01 | 101484.586551 |
| 1 | year-2 | Australia | 2017-10-01 | 107709.864650 |
| 2 | year-1 | Australia/ACT | 2016-10-01 | 2457.401367 |
| 3 | year-2 | Australia/ACT | 2017-10-01 | 2734.748452 |
| 4 | year-1 | Australia/ACT/Business | 2016-10-01 | 754.139245 |
| … | … | … | … | … |
| 5945 | quarter-4 | Australia/Western Australia/Visiting | 2016-10-01 | 787.030391 |
| 5946 | quarter-5 | Australia/Western Australia/Visiting | 2017-01-01 | 702.777251 |
| 5947 | quarter-6 | Australia/Western Australia/Visiting | 2017-04-01 | 642.516090 |
| 5948 | quarter-7 | Australia/Western Australia/Visiting | 2017-07-01 | 646.521395 |
| 5949 | quarter-8 | Australia/Western Australia/Visiting | 2017-10-01 | 813.184778 |
| temporal_id | unique_id | ds | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | year-1 | Australia | 2016-10-01 |
| 1 | year-2 | Australia | 2017-10-01 |
| 2 | year-1 | Australia/ACT | 2016-10-01 |
| 3 | year-2 | Australia/ACT | 2017-10-01 |
| 4 | year-1 | Australia/ACT/Business | 2016-10-01 |
| … | … | … | … |
| 5945 | quarter-4 | Australia/Western Australia/Visiting | 2016-10-01 |
| 5946 | quarter-5 | Australia/Western Australia/Visiting | 2017-01-01 |
| 5947 | quarter-6 | Australia/Western Australia/Visiting | 2017-04-01 |
| 5948 | quarter-7 | Australia/Western Australia/Visiting | 2017-07-01 |
| 5949 | quarter-8 | Australia/Western Australia/Visiting | 2017-10-01 |
3b. Computing base forecasts
Now, we need to compute base forecasts for each temporal aggregation. The following cell computes the base forecasts for each temporal aggregation inY_train_df_te using the AutoETS model. Observe that
Y_hat_df_te contains the forecasts but they are not coherent.
Note also that both frequency and horizon are different for each
temporal aggregation. In this example, the lowest level has a quarterly
frequency, and a horizon of 8 (constituting 2 years). The year
aggregation thus has a yearly frequency with a horizon of 2.
It is of course possible to choose a different model for each level in
the temporal aggregation - you can be as creative as you like!
3c. Reconcile forecasts
We can again use theHierarchicalReconciliation class to reconcile the
forecasts. In this example we use BottomUp and MinTrace. Note that
we have to set temporal=True in the reconcile function.
Note that temporal reconcilation currently isn’t supported for insample
reconciliation methods, such as MinTrace(method='mint_shrink').
4. Evaluation
TheHierarchicalForecast package includes the evaluate function to
evaluate the different hierarchies.
4a. Cross-sectional evaluation
We first evaluate the forecasts across all cross-sectional aggregations.| level | metric | Base | BottomUp | MinTrace(ols) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Total | rmse | 4249.25 | 4461.95 | 4234.55 |
| 1 | Purpose | rmse | 1222.57 | 1273.48 | 1137.57 |
| 2 | State | rmse | 635.78 | 546.02 | 611.32 |
| 3 | Regions | rmse | 103.67 | 107.00 | 99.23 |
| 4 | Bottom | rmse | 33.15 | 33.98 | 32.30 |
| 5 | Overall | rmse | 81.89 | 82.41 | 78.97 |
MinTrace(ols) seems to be the best forecasting method
across each cross-sectional aggregation.
4b. Temporal evaluation
We then evaluate the temporally aggregated forecasts across all temporal aggregations.| level | metric | Base | BottomUp | MinTrace(ols) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | year | rmse | 480.85 | 581.18 | 515.32 |
| 1 | semiannual | rmse | 312.33 | 304.98 | 275.30 |
| 2 | quarter | rmse | 168.02 | 168.02 | 155.61 |
| 3 | Overall | rmse | 253.94 | 266.17 | 241.19 |
MinTrace(ols) is the best overall method, scoring the lowest
rmse on the quarter aggregated forecasts, and being slightly worse
than the Base forecasts on the year aggregated forecasts.
4c. Cross-temporal evaluation
Finally, we evaluate cross-temporally. To do so, we first need to obtain the combination of cross-sectional and temporal hierarchies, for which we can use theget_cross_temporal_tags helper function.
Country//year that contains
Australia//year-1 and Australia//year-2, indicating the
cross-sectional hierarchy Australia at the temporal hierarchies 2016
and 2017.
| level | metric | Base | BottomUp | MinTrace(ols) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | TotalByYear | rmse | 7148.99 | 8243.06 | 7748.40 |
| 1 | RegionsByYear | rmse | 151.96 | 175.69 | 158.48 |
| 2 | BottomByYear | rmse | 46.98 | 50.78 | 46.72 |
| 3 | TotalByQuarter | rmse | 2060.77 | 2060.77 | 1942.32 |
| 4 | RegionsByQuarter | rmse | 57.07 | 57.07 | 54.12 |
| 5 | BottomByQuarter | rmse | 19.42 | 19.42 | 18.69 |
| 6 | Overall | rmse | 43.14 | 45.27 | 42.49 |
AutoETS/MinTrace_method-ols, which achieves overall lowest RMSE.
References
- Hyndman, R.J., & Athanasopoulos, G. (2021). “Forecasting: principles and practice, 3rd edition: Chapter 11: Forecasting hierarchical and grouped series.”. OTexts: Melbourne, Australia. OTexts.com/fpp3 Accessed on July 2022.
- Rob Hyndman, Alan Lee, Earo Wang, Shanika Wickramasuriya, and Maintainer Earo Wang (2021). “hts: Hierarchical and Grouped Time Series”. URL https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=hts. R package version 0.3.1.
- Mitchell O’Hara-Wild, Rob Hyndman, Earo Wang, Gabriel Caceres, Tim-Gunnar Hensel, and Timothy Hyndman (2021). “fable: Forecasting Models for Tidy Time Series”. URL https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=fable. R package version 6.0.2.
- Athanasopoulos, G, Hyndman, Rob J., Kourentzes, N., Petropoulos, Fotios (2017). Forecasting with temporal hierarchies. European Journal of Operational Research, 262, 60-74

