MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125293843 · doi:10.1017/s0266466609990594

UNIT ROOT TESTS WITH WAVELETS

2010· article· en· W3125293843 on OpenAlexaff
Yanqin Fan, Ramazan Gençay

Bibliographic record

VenueEconometric Theory · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaveletUnit rootMathematicsTransformation (genetics)Discrete wavelet transformSpectral densityEnergy (signal processing)Series (stratigraphy)Process (computing)Variance (accounting)Monte Carlo methodStationary processStochastic processStatisticsAlgorithmStatistical physicsWavelet transformComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper develops a wavelet (spectral) approach to testing the presence of a unit root in a stochastic process. The wavelet approach is appealing, since it is based directly on the different behavior of the spectra of a unit root process and that of a short memory stationary process. By decomposing the variance (energy) of the underlying process into the variance of its low frequency components and that of its high frequency components via the discrete wavelet transformation (DWT), we design unit root tests against near unit root alternatives. Since DWT is an energy preserving transformation and able to disbalance energy across high and low frequency components of a series, it is possible to isolate the most persistent component of a series in a small number of scaling coefficients. We demonstrate the size and power properties of our tests through Monte Carlo simulations.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.221
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.221
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 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

Citations158
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconometric TheorySame topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207