Baseline comparison
A test of simple rules, standard statistical methods, and more complex models on your data, so complexity is added only when it helps.
We build forecasting and classification models for planning and operations, and test them against simpler methods on data held back from development.
A prediction is only worth building if it improves a decision. We start by defining that decision, how far ahead it must be made, and what different errors cost. That tells us how accurate a model has to be before it is worth deploying.
A test of simple rules, standard statistical methods, and more complex models on your data, so complexity is added only when it helps.
A tested forecasting or classification model, with its inputs, uncertainty, and typical errors documented.
How predictions reach the people or systems that use them, how they are monitored, and when to review, retrain, or retire the model.
With the decision owner, we define how far ahead to predict, what action follows, and what each kind of error costs.
We test on past data the model never saw, check for leakage (information it would not have at prediction time), and compare results across segments.
Your team uses the output on a real decision, and we check whether it helped before its role expands.
The support plan sets out when to review prediction errors, adjust thresholds, and retrain or retire the model, and who makes those decisions.
Not always. A simple rule or statistical method is sometimes enough, and we recommend the least complicated approach that works.
Yes, to a degree that depends on the method. We show the inputs, assumptions, and uncertainty, and compare the forecast with past outcomes.