1) Log-transformation: log(Y)
2) Forecast results of transformed data: E[g(log(Y))]
3) Inversion of forecast results: exp(E[g(log(Y))])
4) However, what we really want is the expectation of the transformed-forecasted-inversed results, which is E[exp(g(log(Y)))].
Jensen's inequality states that for a convex function φ,
φ(E[X]) <= E[φ(X)]
And equality is only attained if either X is constant or φ is affine. Since neither is (generally) the case here, therefore
exp(E[g(log(Y))]) < E[exp(g(log(Y)))]
An offset factor ε is needed to correct (3) to (4)
E[exp(g(log(Y)))] = exp(E[g(log(Y))]) * ε
Did I get that right? (Offset changed to multiplicative factor)
It strikes me that if you package the entire thing as a random variable:
Z = exp(G(log(Y)))
and use a different kind of forecast function G : Y -> Y' where Y, Y' ~ Normal, then we don't need the multiplicative factor -- which can be difficult to calculate for an arbitrary transformation. We can just get the expected value of Z, ie. E[Z] = E[exp(G(log(Y)))]. This is not done in the article, but in theory it could be.
Here is a paper which addresses the issue in the introduction. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4024993/