← Back to paper list

Citation Analysis

Score-based calibration testing for multivariate forecast distributions
Malte Knüppel, Fabian Krüger, Marc-Oliver Pohle
https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.16362
131
Citation mentions
76
Cited references
8
Sections
6,216
Words (approx)

References by Citation Intensity

Ordered by composite index (descending). Higher values indicate more intensive citation.

# Reference Year Mentions Breadth Sec. Wtd Share Composite Main %
1 Dovern, J. and H. Manner 2020 10 4 18.0 0.076 1.000 100%
2 Gneiting, T., L. I. Stanberry, E. P. Grimit, L. He... 2008 7 3 10.0 0.053 1.000 100%
3 Thorarinsdottir, T. L., M. Scheuerer, and C. Heinz 2016 5 4 8.0 0.038 1.000 100%
4 Knuppel, M 2015 5 3 10.0 0.038 1.000 100%
5 Gneiting, T. and A. E. Raftery 2007 4 3 7.0 0.031 0.928 100%
6 Gneiting, T., F. Balabdaoui, and A. E. Raftery 2007 6 2 9.0 0.046 0.874 100%
7 Wei, W., F. Balabdaoui, and L. Held 2017 3 3 5.0 0.023 0.843 100%
8 Kruger, F., S. Lerch, T. L. Thorarinsdottir, and T... 2021 3 3 6.0 0.023 0.843 100%
9 Gneiting, T. and R. Ranjan 2013 4 2 7.0 0.031 0.811 100%
10 Ziegel, J. F. and T. Gneiting 2014 3 2 4.0 0.023 0.737 100%
11 Tsyplakov, A 2011 3 2 5.0 0.023 0.737 100%
12 Gneiting, T. and M. Katzfuss 2014 2 2 3.0 0.015 0.644 100%
13 Carriero, A., T. Clark, M. Marcellino, and E. Mert... 2022 2 2 3.0 0.015 0.644 100%
14 Clark, M., S. Gangopadhyay, L. Hay, B. Rajagopalan... 2004 2 2 3.0 0.015 0.644 100%
15 Wilks, D. S 2017 2 2 3.0 0.015 0.644 100%
16 Thorarinsdottir, T. L. and N. Schuhen 2018 2 2 3.0 0.015 0.644 100%
17 Genest, C. and L.-P. Rivest 2001 2 2 4.0 0.015 0.644 100%
18 Diebold, F. X., T. A. Gunther, and A. S. Tay 1998 2 1 2.0 0.015 0.511 100%
19 Mincer, J. A. and V. Zarnowitz 1969 2 1 4.0 0.015 0.511 100%
20 Ruschendorf, L 2009 2 1 4.0 0.015 0.511 100%
21 Chen, Y.-T 2011 2 1 4.0 0.015 0.511 100%
22 Mosler, K. and P. Mozharovskyi 2022 2 1 4.0 0.015 0.511 100%
23 Neyman, J 1937 2 1 4.0 0.015 0.511 100%
24 Adrian, T., N. Boyarchenko, and D. Giannone 2019 2 1 4.0 0.015 0.511 100%
25 Gneiting, T 2008 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
26 Koop, G. M 2013 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
27 Chan, J. C. C 2020 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
28 McAlinn, K., K. A. Aastveit, J. Nakajima, and M. W... 2020 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
29 Diks, C., V. Panchenko, O. Sokolinskiy, and D. van... 2014 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
30 Catania, L., S. Grassi, and F. Ravazzolo 2019 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
31 Gupta, R., F. Huber, and P. Piribauer 2020 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
32 Heinrich, C., K. H. Hellton, A. Lenkoski, and T. L... 2021 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
33 Dawid, A. P 1984 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
34 Diebold, F. X., J. Hahn, and A. S. Tay 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
35 Smith, J. Q 1985 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
36 Ziegel, J. F 2015 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
37 Box, G. E. P 1980 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
38 Theil, H 1961 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
39 Guler, K., P. T. Ng, and Z. Xiao 2017 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
40 Rosenblatt, M 1952 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
41 Tsyplakov, A 2014 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
42 Vannitsem, S., D. S. H. Wilks, and J. W. Messner (... 2018 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
43 Clark, T. E 2011 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
44 Craiu, R. V. and J. S. Rosenthal 2014 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
45 West, K. D 1996 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
46 Rossi, B. and T. Sekhposyan 2019 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
47 Giacomini, R. and H. White 2006 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
48 Clements, M. P. and J. Smith 2002 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
49 Ko, S. I. and S. Y. Park 2013 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
50 Szekely, G. J. and M. L. Rizzo 2005 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
51 Lerch, S., T. L. Thorarinsdottir, F. Ravazzolo, an... 2017 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
52 Ziel, F. and K. Berk 2019 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
53 Held, L., K. Rufibach, and F. Balabdaoui 2010 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
54 Pohle, M.-O (self) 2020 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
55 Gneiting, T. and J. Resin 2023 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
56 Dimitriadis, T., T. Gneiting, and A. I. Jordan 2021 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
57 Zuo, Y. and R. Serfling 2000 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
58 Galv\ ao, A. and J. Mitchell 2019 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
59 Clements, M. P 2014 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
60 Kruger, F. and L. Pavlova 2023 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
61 Bollerslev, T 1990 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
62 Dawid, A. P. and P. Sebastiani 1999 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
63 Primiceri, G. E 2005 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
64 Del Negro, M. and G. E. Primiceri 2015 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
65 Kruger, F 2015 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
66 Giacomini, R. and B. Rossi 2010 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
67 Barndorff-Nielsen, O. E., P. R. Hansen, A. Lunde, ... 2008 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
68 Barndorff-Nielsen, O. E., P. R. Hansen, A. Lunde, ... 2009 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
69 Chernozhukov, V., I. Fernandez-Val, and A. Galicho... 2010 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
70 Koenker, R 2021 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
71 \vZike\vs, F. and J. Barun\'\ik 2015 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
72 Corsi, F 2009 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
73 Schefzik, R., T. L. Thorarinsdottir, and T. Gneiti... 2013 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
74 Grothe, O., F. Kachele, and F. Kruger 2023 1 1 2.0 0.008 0.406 100%
75 Gabry, J., D. Simpson, A. Vehtari, M. Betancourt, ... 2019 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
76 Cockayne, J., M. M. Graham, C. J. Oates, T. Sulliv... 2022 1 1 1.0 0.008 0.406 100%
Measures: Mentions = total in-text citations; Breadth = distinct sections; Sec. Wtd = section-weighted count (body ×2, lit review/appendix ×0.5); Share = mentions / total citations in paper; Composite = geometric mean of normalised count, breadth, and main-text ratio; Main % = fraction of mentions in main text (excl. appendix). (self) = self-citation.

Citation intensity data generated from LaTeX source analysis.