MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404235644 · doi:10.1016/j.jeconom.2024.105875

Inference in predictive quantile regressions

2024· article· en· W4404235644 on OpenAlexafffund
Alex Maynard, Katsumi Shimotsu, Nina Kuriyama

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Econometrics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEconometricsInferenceQuantileQuantile regressionPredictive inferenceStatisticsMathematicsComputer scienceFrequentist inferenceArtificial intelligenceBayesian inferenceBayesian probability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies inference in predictive quantile regressions when the predictive regressor has a near-unit root. We derive asymptotic distributions for the quantile regression estimator and its heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent (HAC) t -statistic in terms of functionals of Ornstein–Uhlenbeck processes. We then propose a switching-fully modified (FM) predictive test for quantile predictability. The proposed test employs an FM style correction with a Bonferroni bound for the local-to-unity parameter when the predictor has a near unit root. It switches to a standard predictive quantile regression test with a slightly conservative critical value when the largest root of the predictor lies in the stationary range. Simulations indicate that the test has a reliable size in small samples and good power. We employ this new methodology to test the ability of three commonly employed, highly persistent and endogenous lagged valuation regressors – the dividend price ratio, earnings price ratio, and book-to-market ratio – to predict the median, shoulders, and tails of the stock return distribution.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.421
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.096 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EconometricsSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207