MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

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

2021· dataset· en· W3121577815 on OpenAlexaff
Fabrizio Iacone, Robert Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrder (exchange)EconometricsComputer scienceMathematicsEconomics

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(δ) for any δ lying in the usual stationary and invertible region of the parameter space. The second extension is the more substantive and addresses the well known issue 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. To deal with this inference problem we 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 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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.144
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.144
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.371
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.109 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207