MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035989566 · doi:10.1080/07350015.2021.1876712

Semiparametric Tests for the Order of Integration in the Possible Presence of Level Breaks

2021· article· en· W3035989566 on OpenAlexafffund
Fabrizio Iacone, Morten Ørregaard Nielsen, A.M. Robert Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Business and Economic Statistics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsDanmarks GrundforskningsfondNational Research Foundation
KeywordsOrder (exchange)EconometricsMathematicsStatisticsPsychologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lobato and Robinson (1998) develop semiparametric tests for the null hypothesis that a series is weakly autocorrelated, or I(0), about a constant level, against fractionally integrated alternatives. These tests have the advantage that the user is not required to specify a parametric model for any weak autocorrelation present in the series. We extend this approach in two distinct ways. First, we show that it can be generalised to allow for testing of the null hypothesis that a series is I(ffi) for any ffi lying in the usual stationary and invertible region of the parameter space. Second, it is well known in the literature that long memory and level breaks can be mistaken for one another, with unmodelled level breaks rendering fractional integration tests highly unreliable. We therefore extend the Lobato and Robinson (1998) approach to allow for the possibility of changes in level at unknown points in the series. We show that the resulting statistics have standard limiting null distributions, and that the tests based on these statistics attain the same asymptotic local power functions as infeasible tests based on the unobserved errors, and hence there is no loss in asymptotic local power from allowing for level breaks, even where none is present. We report results from a Monte Carlo study into the finite-sample behaviour of our proposed tests, as well as several empirical examples.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Business and Economic StatisticsSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207