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

UNIT ROOT TESTS WITH WAVELETS

2010· article· en· W3125293843 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.003

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