MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2779817446 · doi:10.1093/restud/rdz028

Identification and Estimation in Non-Fundamental Structural VARMA Models

2019· article· en· W2779817446 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Gouriéroux, Alain Monfort, Jean‐Paul Renne

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Review of Economic Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInvertible matrixAutoregressive modelParametric statisticsAutoregressive–moving-average modelApplied mathematicsIdentification (biology)GaussianMathematicsPolynomialRepresentation (politics)Independence (probability theory)Matrix (chemical analysis)Parameter identification problemWhite noiseMoving averageEconometricsMathematical analysisStatisticsPure mathematicsLawPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The basic assumption of a structural vector autoregressive moving average (SVARMA) model is that it is driven by a white noise whose components are uncorrelated or independent and can be interpreted as economic shocks, called “structural” shocks. When the errors are Gaussian, independence is equivalent to non-correlation and these models face two identification issues. The first identification problem is “static” and is due to the fact that there is an infinite number of linear transformations of a given random vector making its components uncorrelated. The second identification problem is “dynamic” and is a consequence of the fact that, even if a SVARMA admits a non-invertible moving average (MA) matrix polynomial, it may feature the same second-order dynamic properties as a VARMA process in which the MA matrix polynomials are invertible (the fundamental representation). The aim of this article is to explain that these difficulties are mainly due to the Gaussian assumption, and that both identification challenges are solved in a non-Gaussian framework if the structural shocks are assumed to be instantaneously and serially independent. We develop new parametric and semi-parametric estimation methods that accommodate non-fundamentalness in the MA dynamics. The functioning and performances of these methods are illustrated by applications conducted on both simulated and real data.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations40
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Review of Economic StudiesSame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207