TABLE 3
FROM:
Forecasting and evaluating the tourist hotel industry performance in Taiwan based on Grey theory
Wann-Yih Wu, Shih-Wen Hsiao and Cheng-Hung Tsai
BACK TO ARTICLETable 3. The forecasting results and accuracy for three GM(1,1) models
| Actual output value (NT$) | GM model 1 | GM model 2 | Regression model 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | 4-point | Time series | |||||
| Year | Forecasted output value | Residual error % | Forecasted output value | Residual error % | Forecasted output value | Residual error % | |
| 1992 | 21,465,831,998 | ||||||
| 1993 | 22,234,633,523 | 27,140,759,132 | 22.07 | 22,303,251,745 | 0.42 | 25,678,402,798 | 15.49 |
| 1994 | 25,750,153,632 | 27,881,043,038 | 8.28 | 25,522,235,777 | 1.38 | 26,698,452,031 | 3.68 |
| 1995 | 29,184,689,732 | 28,641,518,724 | 1.86 | 29,205,809,381 | 0.42 | 27,718,501,263 | 5.02 |
| 1996 | 31,053,639,916 | 29,422,736,937 | 5.25 | 33,421,025,848 | 1.78 | 28,738,550,496 | 7.46 |
| 1997 | 33,641,675,517 | 30,225,263,444 | 10.16 | 34,305,310,531 | 0.30 | 29,758,599,728 | 11.54 |
| 1998 | 33,642,930,221 | 31,049,679,443 | 7.71 | 36,022,076,727 | 0.29 | 30,778,648,960 | 8.51 |
| 1999 | 34,108,824,585 | 31,896,581,988 | 6.49 | 35,414,710,424 | 0.00 | 31,798,698,193 | 6.77 |
| 2000 | 34,137,942,567 | 32,766,584,414 | 4.02 | 34,268,598,742 | 0.33 | 32,818,747,425 | 3.86 |
| 2001 | 34,167,060,549 | 33,660,316,788 | 1.48 | 34,460,034,448 | 1.54 | 33,838,796,658 | 0.96 |
| 2002 | 33,689,914,911 | 34,578,426,361 | 2.64 | 34,196,217,859 | 4.60 | 34,858,845,890 | 3.47 |
| 2003 | 30,994,491,154 | 35,521,578,039 | 14.61 | 33,553,714,009 | 0.37 | 35,878,895,122 | 15.76 |
| 2004 | 35,051,785,075 | 36,490,454,864 | 4.10 | 29,931,108,225 | — | 36,898,944,355 | 5.27 |
| 2005 | 38,917,856,693 | 37,485,758,507 | 3.68 | 34,677,915,626 | — | 37,918,993,587 | 2.57 |
| 2006 | (Forecast) | 38,508,209,780 | 43,621,068,618 | 38,939,042,820 | |||
| The grades of forecasting accuracy | |||||||
| GM model 1 | GM model 2 | Time series model 3 | |||||
| Average residual error | Useful | 7.10% | Useful | 1.04% | Residual error | 6.95% | |
| Accuracy rate | 92.90% | 98.96% | Accuracy rate | 93.05% | |||
| C | Just the mark | 0.52 | Good | 0.29 | R 2 | 0.72 | |
| P | 0.85 | 0.97 |
2
| 0.70 | |||

2