Robust and powerful serial correlation tests with new robust estimates in ARX models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. We consider robust serial correlation tests in autoregressive models with exogenous variables (ARX). Since the least squares estimators are not robust when outliers are present, a new family of estimators is introduced, called residual autocovariances for ARX (RA‐ARX). They provide resistant estimators that are less sensible to abnormal observations in the output variable of the dynamic model. Such ‘bad’ observations could be due to unexpected phenomena such as economic crisis or equipment failure in engineering, among others. We show that the new robust estimators are consistent and we can consider robust and powerful tests of serial correlation in ARX models based on these estimators. The new one‐sided tests of serial correlation are obtained in extending Hong's (1996) approach in a framework resistant to outliers. They are based on a weighted sum of robust squared residual autocorrelations and on any robust and n1/2‐consistent estimators. Our approach generalizes Li's (1988) test statistic, that can be interpreted as a test using the truncated uniform kernel. However, many kernels deliver a higher power. This is confirmed in a simulation study, where we investigate the finite sample properties of the new robust serial correlation tests in comparison to some commonly used robust and non‐robust tests.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.030 | 0.159 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".