Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Preprint |
| Publicado: |
2026
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.20315 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1866912976464773120 |
|---|---|
| author | Crespi, Federico Garcia Funes, Eduardo Yubero Simon, Marina Alfosea |
| author_facet | Crespi, Federico Garcia Funes, Eduardo Yubero Simon, Marina Alfosea |
| contents | (a) Many air quality forecasting studies report gains from machine learning, but evaluations often use static chronological splits and omit persistence baselines, so the operational added value under routine updating is unclear.
(b) Using 2,350 daily PM10 observations from 2017 to 2024 at an urban background monitoring station in southern Europe, we compare XGBoost and SARIMA against persistence under a static split and a rolling-origin protocol with monthly updates. We report horizon-specific skill and the predictability horizon, defined as the maximum horizon with positive persistence-relative skill. Static evaluation suggests XGBoost performs well from one to seven days ahead, but rolling-origin evaluation reverses rankings: XGBoost is not consistently better than persistence at short and intermediate horizons, whereas SARIMA remains positively skilled across the full range.
(c) For researchers, static splits can overstate operational usefulness and change rankings. For practitioners, rolling-origin, persistence-referenced skill profiles show which methods stay reliable at each lead time. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2603_20315 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Rolling-Origin Validation Reverses Model Rankings in Multi-Step PM10 Forecasting: XGBoost, SARIMA, and Persistence Crespi, Federico Garcia Funes, Eduardo Yubero Simon, Marina Alfosea Machine Learning (a) Many air quality forecasting studies report gains from machine learning, but evaluations often use static chronological splits and omit persistence baselines, so the operational added value under routine updating is unclear. (b) Using 2,350 daily PM10 observations from 2017 to 2024 at an urban background monitoring station in southern Europe, we compare XGBoost and SARIMA against persistence under a static split and a rolling-origin protocol with monthly updates. We report horizon-specific skill and the predictability horizon, defined as the maximum horizon with positive persistence-relative skill. Static evaluation suggests XGBoost performs well from one to seven days ahead, but rolling-origin evaluation reverses rankings: XGBoost is not consistently better than persistence at short and intermediate horizons, whereas SARIMA remains positively skilled across the full range. (c) For researchers, static splits can overstate operational usefulness and change rankings. For practitioners, rolling-origin, persistence-referenced skill profiles show which methods stay reliable at each lead time. |
| title | Rolling-Origin Validation Reverses Model Rankings in Multi-Step PM10 Forecasting: XGBoost, SARIMA, and Persistence |
| topic | Machine Learning |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.20315 |