Mean average percentage error

RECKITT BENCKISER achieved 35% reduction in forecast error based on Mean Average Percentage Error (MAPE) from 23% to 15%, and also increased visibility of customer demand, generating a unique demand plan for the whole organization. 

The mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) is the average absolute error as a percentage of d and and is given by... 

Calculate the percentage root mean square prediction errors for each of the six variables as follows, (i) Calculate residuals between predicted and observed, (ii) Calculate the root mean square of these residuals, taking care to divide by 5 rather than 8 to account for the loss of three degrees of freedom due to the PLS components and the centring, (iii) Divide by the sample standard deviation for each parameter and multiply by 100 (note that it is probably more relevant to use the standard deviation than the average in this case). 

Figure 7. Effect of environmental temperature on the systemic absorption of VX in humans, following topical application to the face (cheek). Absorption is expressed as a percentage of the applied dose penetrated (average standard error of mean) 3 h post-exposure. Data from Craig et al. (1977)...

Once the MLR model has been developed for these 283 mixtiu-es cases, we obtain the equation which can be seen in Table 21.2. This table shows the /P coefficient and the root mean square error (RMSE) and the average percentage deviation (APD) calculated by Equations 21.5 and 21.6, respectively, where corresponds with number of data cases ... 

Adjustments for 283 cases (all cases) and for 212 cases (without [C jmim][Cl]). B is the square correlation coefficient, RMSE is the root mean square error, and APD is the average percentage deviation for MLR model developed. 

This is also demonstrated in Fig. 23.19, where the approximation function according to (23.12) was drawn as a line calculated with the approximation parameters n = —0.169 and m = 0.08 fitting the mean and the maximum secondary drop diameter ( 50,3 and dependencies. The average relative error percentage for the deviations of the experimental data from the approximation functions were 9 % and 10 % for X5o,3/x5o,3,initiai and X9o,3/x9o,3,initiai, respectively. 

Table 14 is of the concentration predictions using two components. The sum of squares of the errors is 0.376. Dividing this by 22 and taking the square root leads to a root mean square error of 0.131 mg L 1. The average concentration of pyrene is 0.456 mg L 1. Hence the percentage root mean square error is 28.81%. 

Predict die eight responses using y = D.b and calculate the percentage root mean square error, adjusted for degrees of freedom, relative to the average response. 

In the model of question 2, plot a graph of predicted against true concentrations. Determine the root mean square error both in mM and as a percentage of the average. Comment. 

The true mass of a glass bead is 0.1026 g. A student takes four measurements of the mass of the bead on an analytical balance and obtains the following results 0.1021 g, 0.1025 g, 0.1019 g, and 0.1023 g. Calculate the mean, the average deviation, the standard deviation, the percentage relative standard deviation, the absolute error of the mean, and the relative error of the mean. 

Glucose and lactate dialysate averaged data from the monitoring of seven patients healthy tissue and five compromised anastomotic tissue is presented as mean standard error. The percentage of change was plotted over a common axis of time as shown in Figure 1. 

Figure 16 Average detection and localization (lateralization) thresholds, expressed as logic of the percentage in solution, standard error of the mean (s.e.m.) (those for lateralization are buried within the marker and cannot be seen), across the age range of subjects, grouped by decade. (From Ref. [28].)...

One final consideration is to ensure that the collected data are consistent This means that we must verify the mass balance around the column and cannot accept yield percentages only to calculate flowrates. This may require observation of the unit over a significant period of time, in order to collect a data set that is acceptable. If this is not possible, averaging the yields and column performance over a short period of time may be acceptable. However, we must accept a higher threshold for error between these average measured operating conditions/profiles and predicted values. We can also compare the model predictions to a large databank of historical measurements (1 to 3 months) to help validate the model in question. 

---