arXiv · 2608.04547
Attributing Differences Between Forecast Runs to Input Changes, With Applications to CCAR and CECL Exercises
Abstract
Forecasting systems used in the Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR) and Current Expected Credit Losses (CECL) processes combine portfolio data, macroeconomic scenarios, model specifications, business assump- tions, and management adjustments. When the forecast changes from one run to the next, practitioners need an attribu- tion that reconciles to the total change without depending on an arbitrary sequence of input replacements. This paper formulates forecast-gap attribution as a cooperative game and examines several approaches: the exact Shapley value, hierarchical or nested Shapley values, Integrated Gradients, Gradient SHAP, Permutation SHAP, and Kernel SHAP. We compare their allocation rules, computational costs, implementation requirements, and limitations in production forecasting systems. The analysis provides a practical framework for choosing an attribution method according to the number and type of inputs, the feasibility of hybrid forecast runs, and the need for interpretability, reproducibility, and governance.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Xuan Mei, Junze Lin. 2026-08-05. Attributing Differences Between Forecast Runs to Input Changes, With Applications to CCAR and CECL Exercises. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.04547
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.