MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Smooth Transition GARCH Models in Forecasting Non-Linear Economic Time Series Data

2013· article· en· W1841063614 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. O. Akintunde, P. M. Kgosi, D. K. Shangodoyin

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in applied mathematics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityEconometricsVolatility (finance)EconomicsAutoregressive modelSeries (stratigraphy)Liberian dollarVector autoregressionTime seriesExchange rateVariance (accounting)MathematicsStatisticsMacroeconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The need to capture the heterogeneous and volatility nature of both financial and economic time series theory and modeling their behavior in practical work have stimulated interest in the empirical modeling of variances which forms the basis for this study. In the study we augmented GARCH models with smooth transition model by dropping the assumption of autoregression of the model; necessary theoretical frame work was derived and properties of the new model established and illustrated with foreign exchange rate data from Federal Republic of Nigeria (Naira), Great Britain (Pound), Botswana (Pula) and Japanese (Yen) against United States of America (Dollar). The smooth transition GARCH model is better than the classical GARCH model as there were reduction in the variances of the augmented model; this claim is confirmed by the empirical illustration with foreign exchange data. Within the group of smooth transition GARCH model, Logistic Smooth Transition is adjudged the best as it produced the least variance.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProgress in applied mathematicsSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207