What is what ? A simple time-domain test of long-memory vs. structural breaks, preprint
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a new time-domain test of a process being I(d), 0 < d ≤ 1, under the null, against the alternative of being I(0) with deterministic components subject to structural breaks at known or unknown dates, with the goal of disentangling the existing identification issue between long-memory and structural breaks. Denoting by AB(t) the different types of structural breaks in the deterministic components of a time series considered by Perron (1989), the test statistic proposed here is based on the t-ratio (or the infimum of a sequence of t-ratios) of the estimated coefficient on yt−1 in an OLS regression of ∆dyt on a simple transformation of the above-mentioned deterministic components and yt−1, possibly augmented by a suitable number of lags of ∆dyt to account for serial correlation in the error terms. The case where d = 1 coincides with the Perron (1989) or the Zivot and Andrews (1992) approaches if the break date is known or unknown, respectively. The statistic is labelled as the SB-FDF (Structural Break-Fractional Dickey- Fuller) test, since it is based on the same principles as the well-known Dickey-Fuller unit root test. Both its asymptotic behavior and finite sample properties are analyzed, and two empirical applications are provided. ∗We are grateful to Manuel Santos and participants in seminars at IGIER (Milan), ESEM 2004 (Madrid) and Univ.de Montreal for helpful comments. Special thanks go to Benedikt Pöstcher for help in one of
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 | 0.014 | 0.102 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".