MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W388974110 · doi:10.12697/acutm.2015.19.01

First-order random coefficient autoregressive (RCA(1)) model: Joint Whittle estimation and information

2015· article· en· W388974110 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

VenueActa et Commentationes Universitatis Tartuensis de Mathematica · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive modelMathematicsSeries (stratigraphy)Applied mathematicsNonlinear systemSTAR modelAutoregressive integrated moving averageStatisticsLeast-squares function approximationTime series

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Random coefficient autoregressive model, RCA(p), has been discussed widely as a suitable model for nonlinear time series. The conditional least squares and likelihood parameter estimation of RCA(p) model has also been discussed in [3]. The statistical inference of RCA(1) model has been presented in [4] while the conditional least square estimates for nonstationary processes is studied in [7]. The optimal estimation for nonlinear time series using estimating equations has been investigated in [6]. Recently there has been interest in joint prediction based on spectral density of popular nonlinear time series models such as RCA(p) models. Another way of estimating the parameters of the RCA(1) model is to do Whittle's estimation. In this paper the Whittle estimates of the parameters of an RCA(p) model are studied. It is shown that the Whittle information of the autoregressive parameter in an RCA(p) model is larger than the corresponding information in an autoregressive (AR) model.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score0.738

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 communication0.0000.002
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.199 · 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