The Realized Empirical Distribution Function of Stochastic Variance with Application to Goodness-of-Fit Testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a nonparametric estimator of the empirical distribution function (EDF) of the latent spot variance of the log-price of a financial asset. We show that over a fixed time span our realized EDF (or REDF)-inferred from noisy high-frequency data-is consistent as the mesh of the observation grid goes to zero. In a double-asymptotic framework, with time also increasing to infinity, the REDF converges to the cumulative distribution function of volatility, if it exists. We exploit these results to construct some new goodness-of-fit tests for stochastic volatility models. In a Monte Carlo study, the REDF is found to be accurate over the entire support of volatility. This leads to goodness-of-fit tests that are both correctly sized and relatively powerful against common alternatives. In an empirical application, we recover the REDF from stock market high-frequency data. We inspect the goodness-of-fit of several two-parameter marginal distributions that are inherent in standard stochastic volatility models. The inverse Gaussian offers the best overall description of random equity variation, but the fit is less than perfect. This suggests an extra parameter (as available in, e.g., the generalized inverse Gaussian) is required to model stochastic variance.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".