MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963716239 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11518

A semiparametric approach for modelling multivariate nonlinear time series

2019· article· en· W2963716239 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
S. Yaser Samadi, Mahtab Hajebi, Rahman Farnoosh

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNonparametric statisticsSemiparametric regressionEstimatorAutoregressive modelMathematicsSemiparametric modelParametric statisticsSeries (stratigraphy)Consistency (knowledge bases)Applied mathematicsEconometricsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this article, a semiparametric time‐varying nonlinear vector autoregressive (NVAR) model is proposed to model nonlinear vector time series data. We consider a combination of parametric and nonparametric estimation approaches to estimate the NVAR function for both independent and dependent errors. We use the multivariate Taylor series expansion of the link function up to the second order which has a parametric framework as a representation of the nonlinear vector regression function. After the unknown parameters are estimated by the maximum likelihood estimation procedure, the obtained NVAR function is adjusted by a nonparametric diagonal matrix, where the proposed adjusted matrix is estimated by the nonparametric kernel estimator. The asymptotic consistency properties of the proposed estimators are established. Simulation studies are conducted to evaluate the performance of the proposed semiparametric method. A real data example on short‐run interest rates and long‐run interest rates of United States Treasury securities is analyzed to demonstrate the application of the proposed approach. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 47: 668–687; 2019 © 2019 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207