Nonparametric cointegration analysis of fractional systems with unknown integration orders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper a nonparametric variance ratio testing approach is proposed for determining the cointegration rank in fractionally integrated systems. The test statistic is easily calculated without prior knowledge of the integration order of the data, the strength of the cointegrating relations, or the cointegration vector(s). The latter property makes it easier to implement than regression-based approaches, especially when examining relationships between several variables with possibly multiple cointegrating vectors. Since the test is nonparametric, it does not require the specification of a particular model and is invariant to short-run dynamics. Nor does it require the choice of any smoothing parameters that change the test statistic without being reflected in the asymptotic distribution. Furthermore, a consistent estimator of the cointegration space can be obtained from the procedure. The asymptotic distribution theory for the proposed test is non-standard but easily tabulated or simulated. Monte Carlo simulations demonstrate excellent finite sample properties, even rivaling those of well-specified parametric tests. The proposed methodology is applied to the term structure of interest rates, where, contrary to both fractional- and integer-based parametric approaches, evidence in favor of the expectations hypothesis is found using the nonparametric approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".