Talk:Directional symmetry (time series)

Latest comment: 10 years ago by Michael Hardy in topic Much work is still needed

This is a really lousy article! edit

It says it's about symmetry, and same/opposite directions, which makes me think it's about geometry, but then it says one tests for it in a certain way, and suddenly it's talking about---of all things!---signals! It's as if the author assumed that the reader SOMEHOW knew that _signals_ were what this is about! Michael Hardy (talk) 03:09, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

I agree with you that the name is not an appropriate one, but the name is now widely used in time-series forecasting and signal estimation literature at least for a decade. in 2005 I found out that there is no page in Wikipedia about this measure, so I created one. Therefore, I think it is not possible to remove this page because it defines a widely used phrase in the literature. But, maybe some edits are needed to improve this page. I take your notice to some papers which have used this measure:
-Drossu, Radu, and Zoran Obradovic. "INFFC data analysis: lower bounds and testbed design recommendations." Computational Intelligence for Financial Engineering (CIFEr), 1997., Proceedings of the IEEE/IAFE 1997. IEEE, 1997.
-Tay, Francis EH, and Lijuan Cao. "Application of support vector machines in financial time series forecasting." Omega 29.4 (2001): 309-317.
-Xiong, Tao, Yukun Bao, and Zhongyi Hu. "Beyond one-step-ahead forecasting: Evaluation of alternative multi-step-ahead forecasting models for crude oil prices." Energy Economics 40 (2013): 405-415..
Thanks for your attention. Ses (talk) 11:19, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply
I should add that this measure shows whether two signals are moving in a symmetric synchronized directions or they move in opposite directions, so it is about signals not geometric objects. Ses (talk) 11:48, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Much work is still needed edit

In the field of time series, it's still not clear whether the title "directional symmetry" might need further disambiguation. The article needs a lot of work if indeed it ought to exist. Michael Hardy (talk) 01:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Reply