MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070572068 · doi:10.1002/cjs.10022

First‐order bias correction for fractionally integrated time series

2009· article· en· W2070572068 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jaechoul Lee, Kyungduk Ko

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorAutocorrelationSeries (stratigraphy)Moment (physics)StatisticsMathematicsLagEconometricsVariance (accounting)Inflation (cosmology)Long memoryApplied mathematicsComputer sciencePhysicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Most of the long memory estimators for stationary fractionally integrated time series models are known to experience non‐negligible bias in small and finite samples. Simple moment estimators are also vulnerable to such bias, but can easily be corrected. In this article, the authors propose bias reduction methods for a lag‐one sample autocorrelation‐based moment estimator. In order to reduce the bias of the moment estimator, the authors explicitly obtain the exact bias of lag‐one sample autocorrelation up to the order n −1 . An example where the exact first‐order bias can be noticeably more accurate than its asymptotic counterpart, even for large samples, is presented. The authors show via a simulation study that the proposed methods are promising and effective in reducing the bias of the moment estimator with minimal variance inflation. The proposed methods are applied to the northern hemisphere data. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 37: 476–493; 2009 © 2009 Statistical Society of Canada

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.215
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207