MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1958202065 · doi:10.1111/jtsa.12118

Bootstrap Inference in Regressions with Estimated Factors and Serial Correlation

2015· article· en· W1958202065 on OpenAlexafffund
Antoine Djogbenou, Śılvia Gonçalves, Benoît Perron

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Time Series Analysis · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCenter for Interuniversity Research and Analysis on Organizations
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaToulouse School of Economics
KeywordsMathematicsInferenceStatisticsConfidence intervalResidualRegressionContext (archaeology)Bootstrap aggregatingEconometricsAutocorrelationRegression analysisStandard errorAlgorithmComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article considers bootstrap inference in a factor‐augmented regression context where the errors could potentially be serially correlated. This generalizes results in Gonçalves & Perron (2014) and makes the bootstrap applicable to forecasting contexts where the forecast horizon is greater than one. We propose and justify two residual‐based approaches, a block wild bootstrap and a dependent wild bootstrap. Our simulations document improvement in coverage rates of confidence intervals for the coefficients when using block wild bootstrap or dependent wild bootstrap relative to both asymptotic theory and the wild bootstrap when serial correlation is present in the regression errors.

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.248
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.248
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations25
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Time Series AnalysisSame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207