Testing for linear autoregressive dynamics under heteroskedasticity
异方差下线性自回归动态的检验AI 解读 ↓
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。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要同时研究自回归动态检验,以及GARCH、TGARCH和随机波动率下的异方差影响。
异方差下线性自回归动态的检验AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
A puzzling characteristic of asset returns for various frequencies is the often observed positive autocorrelation at lag one. To some extent this can be explained by standard asset pricing models when assuming time-varying risk premia. However, one often finds better results when directly fitting an autoregressive model, for which there is little economic foundation. One may ask whether the underlying process does in fact contain an autoregressive component. It is therefore of interest to have a statistical test at hand that performs well under the stylized facts of financial returns. In this paper, we investigate empirical properties of competing devices to test for autoregressive dynamics in case of heteroskedastic errors. For the volatility process we assume GARCH, TGARCH and stochastic volatility. The results indicate that standard quasi-maximum-likelihood inference for the autoregressive parameter is negatively affected by misspecification of the volatility process. We show that bootstrapped versions of least-squares-based statistics have better empirical size and comparable power properties. Applied to German stock return data, the alternative tests yield very different p-values for a considerable number of stock return processes.