On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, Allin Cottrell wrote:
On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, oleg_komashko(a)ukr.net wrote:
> Dear all,
> arima command gives somewhat inconsistent results:
> 1) estimates are different from ones on Ubuntu and Windows 8
> 2) estimates are different when there are more than one
> call of the same model inside an user-specified function
> To be more precise:
> linux_2_arma.inp is the script to illustrate the problem
> linux_2_arma_output was obtained on April's git on Ubuntu 16.10, 64
> The results are the same as ones from 09.05 snapshot on Windows 8, 64
> (linux_2_arma_output)
> Output from 09.05 snapshot on Windows 10, 64 is in win10_try_res.txt
> Also with --x12-arima option output on W-10 is ok
Thanks for the report, Oleh.
There are two points here: (1) difference in arima output between
Linux and Windows 10; and (2) difference in arima output across
two calls to estimate the same model in the context of a function.
On (1) we need to look into this, but since the Linux and Windows
builds use different compilers, small differences in results for
nonlinear problems are expected. I'm not yet sure whether the
differences in question are small enough to be ignorable, but
we'll see.
On (2) it seems there must be a bug somewhere -- particularly
since two successive calls to estimate the same arima model in a
"main" script (not in a function) produce identical results. On
initial inspection it seems that initialization (via NLS) is
producing different starting parameter values in the two calls to
"arma" within a function, though not outside of a function. I
don't yet understand why that should be, but hopefully I'll have
something to report before long.
Point (2) is now fixed in git: calling arma/arima on the same model
successively should produce exactly the same results, whether you're
working inside a function or not. This was a bug, but a fairly
benign one; it was just to do with the initialization. The second
invocation inside a function inherited some information from the
first -- unintentionally -- thereby causing it to produce trivially
different results.
Point (1) remains to be addressed.
Allin