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:摘要研究二次差分、单位根相关检验及初始值和确定性趋势处理,直接对应时间序列推断。

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

二次差分检验:去均值、去趋势方法与初始值的作用

研究问题
初始值如何影响基于 OLS 和简单对称最小二乘的二次差分检验,去均值或去趋势能否消除这种依赖?
方法与思路
作者比较直接变换数据与在回归中加入确定性项的处理,分析检验对初始值的相似性、枢轴性,并进行蒙特卡洛研究。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称去均值检验通常依赖初始值,OLS 去趋势可实现精确相似性,SSLS 仅直接去趋势可实现,且模拟中更敏感。
阅读关注点
应核对初始值固定且相等的例外、两种去趋势方式的差异,以及摘要所纠正的统计量等价性和渐近枢轴性结论。
阅读边界
仅据所给 RePEc 出版社摘要;初始值设定和模拟数值未说明,不能将相似性结论扩大为全面优越性或推断版本变化。

原文摘要

In this paper we investigate the impact that starting values have upon the double differencing tests of Hasza and Fuller (1979, Annals of Statistics 7, 1106–1120) and Sen and Dickey (1987, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 5, 463–473), based on ordinary least squares (OLS) and simple symmetric least squares (SSLS) estimation, respectively. We demonstrate that, contrary to what is observed for conventional unit root tests, when based on data that have been demeaned, either directly or by the inclusion of a constant in the test regression, these tests are not exact similar to the starting values of the process, except where they are fixed and equal. We show that such test statistics can also fail to be asymptotically pivotal, contrary to claims made previously in the literature. We demonstrate that OLS tests based on data that have been detrended, either directly or by the inclusion of a constant and linear time trend in the test regression, do provide exact similar inference. In the context of the SSLS-based approach, we demonstrate that one obtains exact similar tests only where direct detrending is used. We highlight another error that appears in the literature, demonstrating that the two demeaned OLS-based test statistics do not coincide, even asymptotically, and that the same holds for the OLS- and SSLS-based test statistics for detrended data. We use Monte Carlo methods to quantify the finite-sample dependence of these tests on the starting values. These results suggest that the SSLS-based tests are considerably more sensitive to the nature of the starting values than are the OLS-based tests.We are grateful to Pentti Saikkonen and two anonymous referees for their helpful and constructive comments on an earlier version of this paper. We are especially grateful to one of the referees for the suggestion implemented in Remark 3.1 of the paper.

笔记与分组