Robust Lagrange multiplier test for detecting ARCH/GARCH effect using permutation and bootstrap
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Lagrange Multiplier (LM) test is one of the principal tools to detect ARCH and GARCH effects in financial data analysis. However, when the underlying data are non‐normal, which is often the case in practice, the asymptotic LM test, based on the χ 2 ‐approximation of critical values, is known to perform poorly, particularly for small and moderate sample sizes. In this paper we propose to employ two re‐sampling techniques to find critical values of the LM test, namely permutation and bootstrap. We derive the properties of exactness and asymptotically correctness for the permutation and bootstrap LM tests, respectively. Our numerical studies indicate that the proposed re‐sampled algorithms significantly improve size and power of the LM test in both skewed and heavy‐tailed processes. We also illustrate our new approaches with an application to the analysis of the Euro/USD currency exchange rates and the German stock index. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 40: 405–426; 2012 © 2012 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".