Author:
Ahmed Sayed Amani Idris,Muhammad Sabri Shamsul Rijal
Abstract
The generalised gamma distribution (GGD) is one of the most widely used statistical distributions used extensively in several scientific and engineering application areas due to its high adaptability with the normal and exponential, lognormal distributions, among others. However, the estimation of the unknown parameters of the model is a challenging task. Many algorithms were developed for parameter estimation, but none can find the best solution. In this study, a simulated annealing (SA) algorithm is proposed for the assessment of effectiveness in determining the parameters for the GDD using modified internal rate of return (MIRR) data extracted from the financial report of the publicly traded Malaysian property companies for long term investment periods (2010–2019). The performance of the SA is compared to the moment method (MM) based on mean absolute error (MAE) and root mean squares errors (RMSE) based on the MIRR data set. The performance of this study reveals that the SA algorithm has a better estimate with the increases in sample size (long-term investment periods) compared to MM, which reveals a better estimate with a small sample size (short-time investment periods). The results show that the SA algorithm approach provides better estimates for GGD parameters based on the MIRR data set for the long-term investment period.
Publisher
Universiti Putra Malaysia
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Environmental Science
Reference47 articles.
1. Abubakar, H., & Sabri, S. R. M. (2021a). Incorporating simulated annealing algorithm in the Weibull distribution for valuation of investment return of Malaysian property development sector. International Journal for Simulation and Multidisciplinary Design Optimization, 12, Article 22. https://doi.org/10.1051-/smdo/2021023
2. Abubakar, H., & Sabri, S. R. M. (2021b). Simulation study on modified weibull distribution for modelling of investment return. Pertanika Journal of Science and Technology, 29(4), 2767-2790. https://doi.org/10.47836/pjst.29.4.29
3. Ahmad, A. G. (2015). Comparative study of bisection and Newton-Rhapson methods of root-finding problems. International Journal of Mathematics Trends and Technology, 19(2), 121-129. https://doi.org/10.14445/22315373/ijmtt-v19p516
4. Baldwin, R. H. (1959). How to assess investment proposals. Harvard Business Review, 37(3), 98-104.
5. Besley, S., & Brigham, E. F. (2015). CFIN4 (with Finance CourseMate). Cengage Learning.