MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1528064681 · doi:10.1002/for.2317

Bayesian Analysis of Asymmetric Stochastic Conditional Duration Model

2014· article· en· W1528064681 on OpenAlexaff
Zhongxian Men, Adam W. Kolkiewicz, Tony S. Wirjanto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forecasting · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsActuaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle filterMarkov chain Monte CarloComputer scienceEconometricsMathematicsBayesian probabilityApplied mathematicsStatisticsKalman filter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This paper proposes Markov chain Monte Carlo methods to estimate the parameters and log durations of the correlated or asymmetric stochastic conditional duration models. Following the literature, instead of fitting the models directly, the observation equation of the models is first subjected to a logarithmic transformation. A correlation is then introduced between the transformed innovation and the latent process in an attempt to improve the statistical fits of the models. In order to perform one‐step‐ahead in‐sample and out‐of‐sample duration forecasts, an auxiliary particle filter is used to approximate the filter distributions of the latent states. Simulation studies and application to the IBM transaction dataset illustrate that our proposed estimation methods work well in terms of parameter and log duration estimation. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ForecastingSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207