Methodology (stat.ME)

Abstract: Inference for prediction errors is critical in time series forecasting pipelines. However, providing statistically meaningful uncertainty intervals for prediction errors remains relatively under-explored. Practitioners often resort to forward cross-validation (FCV) for obtaining point estimators and constructing confidence intervals based on the Central Limit Theorem (CLT). The naive version assumes independence, a condition that is usually invalid due to time correlation. These approaches lack statistical interpretations and theoretical justifications even under stationarity. This paper systematically investigates uncertainty intervals for prediction errors in time series forecasting. We first distinguish two key inferential targets: the stochastic test error over near future data points, and the expected test error as the expectation of the former. The stochastic test error is often more relevant in applications needing to quantify uncertainty over individual time series instances. To construct prediction intervals for the stochastic test error, we propose the quantile-based forward cross-validation (QFCV) method. Under an ergodicity assumption, QFCV intervals have asymptotically valid coverage and are shorter than marginal empirical quantiles. In addition, we also illustrate why naive CLT-based FCV intervals fail to provide valid uncertainty intervals, even with certain corrections. For non-stationary time series, we further provide rolling intervals by combining QFCV with adaptive conformal prediction to give time-average coverage guarantees. Overall, we advocate the use of QFCV procedures and demonstrate their coverage and efficiency through simulations and real data examples.

Abstract: In many randomized experiments, the treatment effect of the long-term metric (i.e. the primary outcome of interest) is often difficult or infeasible to measure. Such long-term metrics are often slow to react to changes and sufficiently noisy they are challenging to faithfully estimate in short-horizon experiments. A common alternative is to measure several short-term proxy metrics in the hope they closely track the long-term metric -- so they can be used to effectively guide decision-making in the near-term. We introduce a new statistical framework to both define and construct an optimal proxy metric for use in a homogeneous population of randomized experiments. Our procedure first reduces the construction of an optimal proxy metric in a given experiment to a portfolio optimization problem which depends on the true latent treatment effects and noise level of experiment under consideration. We then denoise the observed treatment effects of the long-term metric and a set of proxies in a historical corpus of randomized experiments to extract estimates of the latent treatment effects for use in the optimization problem. One key insight derived from our approach is that the optimal proxy metric for a given experiment is not apriori fixed; rather it should depend on the sample size (or effective noise level) of the randomized experiment for which it is deployed. To instantiate and evaluate our framework, we employ our methodology in a large corpus of randomized experiments from an industrial recommendation system and construct proxy metrics that perform favorably relative to several baselines.