MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804887259 · doi:10.1111/jtsa.12438

Nonstationary Cointegration in the Fractionally Cointegrated VAR Model

2018· article· en· W2804887259 on OpenAlexafffund
Søren Johansen, Morten Ørregaard Nielsen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Time Series Analysis · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsDanmarks GrundforskningsfondNational Research Foundation
KeywordsCointegrationEconometricsMathematicsVector autoregressionLong memoryEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the fractional cointegrated vector autoregressive (CVAR) model of Johansen and Nielsen (2012a) and make two distinct contributions. First, in their consistency proof, Johansen and Nielsen (2012a) imposed moment conditions on the errors that depend on the parameter space, such that when the parameter space is larger, stronger moment conditions are required. We show that these moment conditions can be relaxed, and for consistency we require just eight moments regardless of the parameter space. Second, Johansen and Nielsen (2012a) assumed that the cointegrating vectors are stationary, and we extend the analysis to include the possibility that the cointegrating vectors are non‐stationary. Both contributions require new analysis and results for the asymptotic properties of the likelihood function of the fractional CVAR model, which we provide. Finally, our analysis follows recent research and applies a parameter space large enough that the usual (non‐fractional) CVAR model constitutes an interior point and hence can be tested against the fractional model using a Chi‐squared‐test.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations27
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Time Series AnalysisSame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207