跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:题名和摘要直接讨论预测失效及预测损失的结构变化检验,对应预测与结构变化两个方法方向,具体宏观应用对象未说明。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Pierre Perron
Yohei Yamamoto

预测表现变化的检验

研究问题
如何事后判断预测模型的损失是否发生结构变化,并考察训练样本划分和预测更新方式对失效检验功效的影响?
方法与思路
作者将经典结构变化检验用于预测损失,建议固定估计样本,并构造对样本分割点或样本外断点取最大值的检验,以及总损失序列检验。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称,在所考察的数据生成过程中,只有固定估计样本方案下的 DSW 与 TLUD 检验均具有单调功效;理论、模拟和实证用于支持该结论。
阅读关注点
重点核对固定估计样本与滚动、递归方案的区别,各检验搜索断点的范围,以及单调功效结论覆盖的数据生成过程和理论条件。
阅读边界
摘要未说明损失函数、实证数据和具体检验条件;单调功效结论限于文中考察的过程,不能据此认定这些检验在所有预测场景中更优。

原文摘要

We consider the issue of forecast failure (or breakdown) and propose methods to assess retrospectively whether a given forecasting model provides forecasts which show evidence of changes with respect to some loss function. We adapt the classical structural change tests to the forecast failure context. First, we recommend that all tests should be carried with a fixed scheme to have best power. This ensures a maximum difference between the fitted in and out-of-sample means of the losses and avoids contamination issues under the rolling and recursive schemes. With a fixed scheme, Giacomini and Rossi’s (GR) test is simply a Wald test for a one-time change in the mean of the total (the in-sample plus out-of-sample) losses at a known break date, say m, the value that separates the in and out-of-sample periods. To alleviate this problem, we consider a variety of tests: maximizing the GR test over values of m within a prespecified range; a Double sup-Wald (DSW) test which for each m performs a sup-Wald test for a change in the mean of the out-of-sample losses and takes the maximum of such tests over some range; we also propose to work directly with the total loss series to define the Total Loss sup-Wald and Total Loss UDmax (TLUD) tests. Using theoretical analyses and simulations, we show that with forecasting models potentially involving lagged dependent variables, the only tests having a monotonic power function for all data-generating processes considered are the DSW and TLUD tests, constructed with a fixed forecasting window scheme. Some explanations are provided and empirical applications illustrate the relevance of our findings in practice. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

笔记与分组