Bibliographic record
Abstract
We in this article propose a novel non‐parametric estimator for the volatility function within a broad context that encompasses nonlinear time series models as a special case. The new estimator, built on the mode value, is designed to complement existing mean volatility measures to reveal distinct data features. We demonstrate that the suggested modal volatility estimator can be obtained asymptotically as well as if the conditional mean regression function were known, assuming observations are from a strictly stationary and absolutely regular process. Under mild regularity conditions, we establish that the asymptotic distributions of the resulting estimator align with those derived from independent observations, albeit with a slower convergence rate compared to non‐parametric mean regression. The theory and practice of bandwidth selection are discussed. Moreover, we put forward a variance reduction technique for the modal volatility estimator to attain asymptotic relative efficiency while maintaining the asymptotic bias unchanged. We numerically solve the modal regression model with the use of a modified modal‐expectation‐maximization algorithm. Monte Carlo simulations are conducted to assess the finite sample performance of the developed estimation procedure. Two real data analyses are presented to further illustrate the newly proposed model in practical applications. To potentially enhance the accuracy of the bias term, we in the end discuss the extension of the method to local exponential modal estimation. We showcase that the suggested exponential modal volatility estimator shares the same asymptotic variance as the non‐parametric modal volatility estimator but may exhibit a smaller bias.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".