Figures
In subsection 3.2 two example values of the weighted interval score (a score for forecast accuracy described in the paper) were incorrect. The respective sentence should read:
"The WIS (with K = 11 as in the previous section), on the other hand, favors G as its quantiles are generally closer to the observed value y (WIS(F, 190) = 105.3, WIS(G, 190) = 88.9)."
These values had erroneously been given as (WIS(F, 190) = 103.9, WIS(G, 190) = 87.8).
The following code availability information was missing from the published article: code to reproduce Fig 1–6 has been made available at https://github.com/reichlab/proper-scores-comparison. All data used in this paper have been taken from the public cdc-flusight-ensemble repository https://github.com/FluSightNetwork/cdc-flusight-ensemble.
The dark green line shown in the middle right and bottom right panels of Fig 2 and the right panel of Fig 3 did not display the correct values. The authors have provided corrected versions here.
Logarithmic score, absolute error, interval score (with α = 0.2), CRPS, and 2 versions of the weighted interval score. These are denoted by WIS* (with K = 3, α1 = 0.1, α2 = 0.4, α3 = 0.7) and WIS (K = 11, α1 = 0.02, α2 = 0.05, α3 = 0.1,…,α11 = 0.9). Scores are shown as a function of the observed value y. The predictive distribution F is negative binomial with expectation 60 and size 4. Note that the top left panel shows the negative logS, i.e., −logS, which, like the other scores, is negatively oriented (smaller values are better).
Negative logarithmic score and weighted interval score (with α1 = 0.02, α2 = 0.05, α3 = 0.1,…,α11 = 0.9) as a function of the observed value y. The predictive distributions F (green) and G (red) are negative binomials with expectations μF = 60, μG = 80 and sizes ψF = 4, ψG = 10. The black dashed line shows y = 190 as discussed in the text.
Reference
- 1. Bracher J, Ray EL, Gneiting T, Reich NG (2021) Evaluating epidemic forecasts in an interval format. PLoS Comput Biol 17(2): e1008618. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008618 pmid:33577550
Citation: Bracher J, Ray EL, Gneiting T, Reich NG (2022) Correction: Evaluating epidemic forecasts in an interval format. PLoS Comput Biol 18(10): e1010592. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010592
Published: October 5, 2022
Copyright: © 2022 Bracher et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.