A POWERFUL TEST OF THE AUTOREGRESSIVE UNIT ROOT HYPOTHESIS BASED ON A TUNING PARAMETER FREE STATISTIC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a family of simple nonparametric unit root tests indexed by one parameter, d , and containing the Breitung (2002, Journal of Econometrics 108, 342–363) test as the special case d = 1. It is shown that (a) each member of the family with d > 0 is consistent, (b) the asymptotic distribution depends on d and thus reflects the parameter chosen to implement the test, and (c) because the asymptotic distribution depends on d and the test remains consistent for all d > 0, it is possible to analyze the power of the test for different values of d . The usual Phillips–Perron and Dickey–Fuller type tests are indexed by bandwidth, lag length, etc., but have none of these three properties. It is shown that members of the family with d < 1 have higher asymptotic local power than the Breitung (2002) test, and when d is small the asymptotic local power of the proposed nonparametric test is relatively close to the parametric power envelope, particularly in the case with a linear time trend. Furthermore, generalized least squares (GLS) detrending is shown to improve power when d is small, which is not the case for the Breitung (2002) test. Simulations demonstrate that when applying a sieve bootstrap procedure, the proposed variance ratio test has very good size properties, with finite-sample power that is higher than that of the Breitung (2002) test and even rivals the (nearly) optimal parametric GLS detrended augmented Dickey–Fuller test with lag length chosen by an information criterion.
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 | 0.012 | 0.078 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".