Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theory suggests that physical commodity prices may exhibit nonlinear features such as bubbles and various types of asymmetries. This paper investigates these claims empirically by introducing a new time series model apt to capture such features. The data set is composed of 25 individual, continuous contract, commodity futures price series, representative of a number of industry sectors including softs, precious metals, energy, and livestock. It is shown that the linear causal ARMA model with Gaussian innovations is unable to adequately account for the features of the data. In the purely descriptive time series literature, often a threshold autoregression (TAR) is employed to model cycles or asymmetries. Rather than take this approach, we suggest a novel process which is able to accommodate both bubbles and asymmetries in a flexible way. This process is composed of both causal and noncausal components and is formalized as the mixed causal/noncausal autoregressive model of order (r, s). Estimating the mixed causal/noncausal model with leptokurtic errors, by an approximated maximum likelihood method, results in dramatically improved model fit according to the Akaike information criterion. Comparisons of the estimated unconditional distributions of both the purely causal and mixed models also suggest that the mixed causal/noncausal model is more representative of the data according to the Kullback-Leibler measure. Moreover, these estimation results demonstrate that allowing for such leptokurtic errors permits identification of various types of asymmetries. Finally, a strategy for computing the multiple steps ahead forecast of the conditional distribution is discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".