MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223544142 · doi:10.3390/jrfm15040174

Model Selection and Post Selection to Improve the Estimation of the ARCH Model

2022· article· en· W4223544142 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marwan Al‐Momani, Abdaljbbar B. A. Dawod

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive integrated moving averageEstimatorArchHeteroscedasticityModel selectionEconometricsBenchmark (surveying)Autoregressive modelMonte Carlo methodComputer scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)Series (stratigraphy)Time seriesEconomicsMathematicsStatisticsEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Autoregressive Conditionally Heteroscedastic (ARCH) model is useful for handling volatilities in economical time series phenomena that ARIMA models are unable to handle. The ARCH model has been adopted in many applications that contain time series data such as financial market prices, options, commodity prices and the oil industry. In this paper, we propose an improved post-selection estimation strategy. We investigated and developed some asymptotic properties of the suggested strategies and compared with a benchmark estimator. Furthermore, we conducted a Monte Carlo simulation study to reappraise the relative characteristics of the listed estimators. Our numerical results corroborate with the analytical work of the study. We applied the proposed methods on the S&P500 stock market daily closing prices index to illustrate the usefulness of the developed methodologies.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207