Optimization of the generalized covariance estimator in noncausal processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper investigates the performance of routinely used optimization algorithms in application to the Generalized Covariance estimator (GCov) for univariate and multivariate mixed causal and noncausal models. The GCov is a semi-parametric estimator with an objective function based on nonlinear autocovariances to identify causal and noncausal orders. When the number and type of nonlinear autocovariances included in the objective function are insufficient/inadequate, or the error density is too close to the Gaussian, identification issues can arise. These issues result in local minima in the objective function, which correspond to parameter values associated with incorrect causal and noncausal orders. Then, depending on the starting point and the optimization algorithm employed, the algorithm can converge to a local minimum. The paper proposes the Simulated Annealing (SA) optimization algorithm as an alternative to conventional numerical optimization methods. The results demonstrate that SA performs well in its application to mixed causal and noncausal models, successfully eliminating the effects of local minima. The proposed approach is illustrated by an empirical study of a bivariate series of commodity prices.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".