MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040313060 · doi:10.1081/etc-100106997

DYNAMIC FACTOR MODELS

2001· article· en· W2040313060 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Gouriéroux, Joann Jasiak

Bibliographic record

VenueEconometric Reviews · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStochastic volatilityDynamic factorSkewnessComputer scienceEconometricsFactor analysisKurtosisVolatility (finance)MathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces nonlinear dynamic factor models for various applications related to risk analysis. Traditional factor models represent the dynamics of processes driven by movements of latent variables, called the factors. Our approach extends this setup by introducing factors defined as random dynamic parameters and stochastic autocorrelated simulators. This class of factor models can represent processes with time varying conditional mean, variance, skewness and excess kurtosis. Applications discussed in the paper include dynamic risk analysis, such as risk in price variations (models with stochastic mean and volatility), extreme risks (models with stochastic tails), risk on asset liquidity (stochastic volatility duration models), and moral hazard in insurance analysis. We propose estimation procedures for models with the marginal density of the series and factor dynamics parameterized by distinct subsets of parameters. Such a partitioning of the parameter vector found in many applications allows to simplify considerably statistical inference. We develop a two- stage Maximum Likelihood method, called the Finite Memory Maximum Likelihood, which is easy to implement in the presence of multiple factors. We also discuss simulation based estimation, testing, prediction and filtering.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.007

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.144 · 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

Citations14
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconometric ReviewsSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207