Skip to main content
. 2019 Nov 27;16(23):4760. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16234760

Table 1.

Comparison of candidate SARIMA models.

Model Estimate Z p-Value Ljung-Box Q Test AIC BIC RMSE MAPE
Statistics DF p-Value
SARIMA (0,0,1) (0,1,1)12 - - - 22.753 16 0.121 541.661 550.692 1.439 48.744
q 0.654 11.00 0.000 - - - - - - -
Q −0.415 −2.17 0.030 - - - - - - -
SARIMA (1,0,0) (0,1,1)12 - - - 25.607 16 0.060 535.296 544.327 1.407 44.280
p 0.668 25.68 0.000 - - - - - - -
Q −0.445 −2.24 0.025 - - - - - - -
SARIMA (1,0,1) (0,1,1)12 - - - 8.157 15 0.917 523.172 535.214 1.345 44.137
p 0.481 3.15 0.002 - - - - - - -
q −0.393 −3.772 0.074 - - - - - - -
Q 0.473 −2.53 0.012 - - - - - - -
SARIMA (1,0,1) (1,1,1)12 - - - 7.916 14 0.894 525.083 540.136 1.348 44.021
p 0.476 2.93 0.003 - - - - - - -
q 0.399 1.76 0.078 - - - - - - -
P −0.080 −0.10 0.923 - - - - - - -
Q −0.425 −0.50 0.615 - - - - - - -

AIC: Akaike information criterion; BIC: Bayesian information criterion; RMSE: root mean squared error; MAPE: mean absolute percent error; DF: degree of freedom.