Bootstrapping realized multivariate volatility measures,” manuscript, Université de Montréal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study bootstrap methods for statistics that are a function of multivariate high frequency returns such as realized regression coefficients and realized covariances and correlations. For these measures of covariation, the Monte Carlo simulation results of Barndorff-Nielsen and Shephard (2004) show that finite sample distortions associated with their feasible asymptotic theory approach may arise if sampling is not too frequent. This motivates our use of the bootstrap as an alternative tool of inference for covariation measures. We consider an i.i.d. bootstrap applied to the vector of returns. We show that the finite sample performance of the bootstrap is superior to the existing first-order asymptotic theory. Nevertheless, and contrary to the existing results in the bootstrap literature for regression models subject to heteroskedasticity in the error term, the Edgeworth expansion for the i.i.d. bootstrap that we develop here shows that this method is not second order accurate. We argue that this is due to the fact that the conditional mean parameters of realized regression models are heterogeneous under stochastic volatility.
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 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".