2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijforecast.2014.11.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comment on “How Biased are US Government Forecasts of the Federal Debt?”

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

3
29
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
3
29
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the combined evidence in Ericsson (2017) and Gamber and Liebner (2017) supports the interpretation that these forecasts have significant time-varying biases. Both Ericsson (2017) and Gamber and Liebner (2017) advocate using impulse indicator saturation in empirical modeling.…”
Section: Appendix a Interpreting Estimates Of Forecast Biasmentioning
confidence: 54%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…However, the combined evidence in Ericsson (2017) and Gamber and Liebner (2017) supports the interpretation that these forecasts have significant time-varying biases. Both Ericsson (2017) and Gamber and Liebner (2017) advocate using impulse indicator saturation in empirical modeling.…”
Section: Appendix a Interpreting Estimates Of Forecast Biasmentioning
confidence: 54%
“…This appendix resolves differences in results and interpretation between Ericsson's (2017) and Gamber and Liebner's (2017) assessments of forecasts of U.S. gross federal debt. As Gamber and Liebner (2017) discuss, heteroscedasticity could explain the empirical results in Ericsson (2017).…”
Section: Appendix a Interpreting Estimates Of Forecast Biasmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 3 more Smart Citations