Data-Driven Tuning in Kernel Specification Tests: Selection Asymptotics, Validity, and Power
核设定检验的数据驱动调参:选择渐近理论、有效性与功效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。
本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。
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:摘要研究通用条件矩模型的设定检验,未明确限定于所列微观、宏观或金融细分。
核设定检验的数据驱动调参:选择渐近理论、有效性与功效AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
We develop model checks for conditional moment restrictions whose tuning parameters, the kernel bandwidth and the regularization level, are selected by cross-validation. The tests regress the estimated residuals on the covariates via kernel ridge regression (KRR), yielding a coefficient function in a reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS) that vanishes under the null and is nonzero for any misspecification not annihilated by the Neyman projection. Our central contribution is a complete asymptotic theory of the data-driven tuning parameter: its limit law under the null, under fixed alternatives, and under local alternatives, and bootstrap size control under sample splitting with no convergence of the selector required. An exact energy identity shows that cross-validation maximizes the signal captured by the test (its noncentrality) and, absent signal, shrinks its noise floor. The tests are consistent against fixed alternatives, achieve $n^{-1/2}$-rate sensitivity to local alternatives, and use Neyman-orthogonal projections so the model is never re-estimated within bootstrap resamples. Simulations show size close to nominal without user-chosen tuning, power comparable to the kernel conditional moment (KCM) test at its best kernel parameter, and robustness where fixed kernel parameters fail in higher dimensions. Three empirical applications illustrate the diagnostic role of the tests; we recommend a $15$--$20\%$ selection share for the sample-splitting protocol.