Exact Skewness–Kurtosis Tests for Multivariate Normality and Goodness‐of‐Fit in Multivariate Regressions with Application to Asset Pricing Models*
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We study the problem of testing the error distribution in a multivariate linear regression (MLR) model. The tests are functions of appropriately standardized multivariate least squares residuals whose distribution is invariant to the unknown cross‐equation error covariance matrix. Empirical multivariate skewness and kurtosis criteria are then compared with a simulation‐based estimate of their expected value under the hypothesized distribution. Special cases considered include testing multivariate normal and stable error distributions. In the Gaussian case, finite‐sample versions of the standard multivariate skewness and kurtosis tests are derived. To do this, we exploit simple, double and multi‐stage Monte Carlo test methods. For non‐Gaussian distribution families involving nuisance parameters, confidence sets are derived for the nuisance parameters and the error distribution. The tests are applied to an asset pricing model with observable risk‐free rates, using monthly returns on New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) portfolios over 5‐year subperiods from 1926 to 1995.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it