You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I was reviewing the SMAPE for v2.0 and I found something odd that may be a mistake in the documentation or a misunderstanding on my end.
The documentation uses the formula that includes the 2 in the numerator, which, according to this wikipedia page (that is linked into the docs), means that the SMAPE will range between 0 and 2 (or 0% and 200%). However, the docs specify that the SMAPE will range between 0 and 1, which is not totally wrong, because in the implementation (see here) one can see that the 2 is missing and as such, the SMAPE, as calculated by the library, will range between 0 and 1.
The issue here is that the docs shows one formula (the one whose results range 0 and 2) and implements the other one (the one whose results range between 0 and 1), which is a bit inconsistent. Maybe dropping the 2 from the formula will be the easiest solution, although it would be nice to be able to parametrize and have both metrics.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks for pointing it out.
Basically, I took the commonly used equations as an actual implementation, but in my documentation, I forgot to remove the 2. I will remove it to fit the actual implementation code.
Hello, everyone
I was reviewing the SMAPE for v2.0 and I found something odd that may be a mistake in the documentation or a misunderstanding on my end.
The documentation uses the formula that includes the 2 in the numerator, which, according to this wikipedia page (that is linked into the docs), means that the SMAPE will range between 0 and 2 (or 0% and 200%). However, the docs specify that the SMAPE will range between 0 and 1, which is not totally wrong, because in the implementation (see here) one can see that the 2 is missing and as such, the SMAPE, as calculated by the library, will range between 0 and 1.
The issue here is that the docs shows one formula (the one whose results range 0 and 2) and implements the other one (the one whose results range between 0 and 1), which is a bit inconsistent. Maybe dropping the 2 from the formula will be the easiest solution, although it would be nice to be able to parametrize and have both metrics.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: