Stability and limits
Where the model is weakest

A forecast is not much use if it lurches every time the model is updated. Expansion plans, board cases, and rent negotiations rely on numbers that hold their shape, and this is where the gravity structure earns its keep. Because the model's shape comes from how demand is known to behave rather than from whatever correlated in this year's data, it does not reinvent itself whenever a new batch arrives: small changes in the inputs produce small changes in the forecast, not wild swings. That steadiness is exactly what a data-hungry black box cannot promise on a few hundred stores.
As real openings trade and new market data arrives, we recalibrate deliberately and re-check the result out of sample, so an update has to earn its place by genuinely improving accuracy. Human judgement stays in the loop and every change is traceable. Over time the visible effect is the prediction interval tightening as evidence accumulates, not the headline number jumping around.
That same interval, attached to every forecast rather than a bare point estimate, is also how you see where the model is unsure before you act on it. Treat a forecast with more caution, and lean harder on your own judgement, wherever that range is wide or the model is working with thin data.
Only the genuinely sure state their own limits.
Where to trust an IRIS forecast least
No forecasting method is uniformly reliable, and a vendor who implies otherwise is the one to worry about. These are the conditions under which IRIS widens the range and says why, rather than papering over the gap with a confident-looking number.
Why an honest limit is a feature
None of these are defects to be quietly patched before the demo. They are properties of the problem, and naming them is the difference between a tool and a sales pitch. A store's first-year revenue does not exist yet; it depends on how a not-yet-built store trades in a not-yet-arrived year, shaped by competitors, weather, the economy, and a hundred things no dataset contains. Some uncertainty is irreducible. An honest forecast names it; it does not pretend it away.
The practical upshot is a division of labour you can rely on.
| Tight range: a dense, familiar estate | Wide range: a new market or thin data |
|---|---|
| Lean on the number | Carry more of the decision on your own judgement |
| Calibrated against your own comparable stores | Leans more on general market signals than on your own performance |
| The interval tightens as evidence accumulates | The interval stays wide, and says why, until it does |
Where the range is tight and the model is working from a dense, familiar estate, lean on the number. Where the range is wide, read that width as information: the model telling you, plainly, that it is working from little, and that this is a decision to carry more of yourself. That is the posture the whole method is built for, and it is where the series began, with why site selection was never an AI problem. The fastest way to see where the line falls for your own business is to run it on your own stores.