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:摘要围绕新增信息下的即时预测评价,重点研究估计因子模型,并应用于美国 GDP,因此对应宏观预测和因子模型。

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
Jack Fosten
Daniel Gutknecht

使用估计因子检验即时预测的单调性

研究问题
即时预测质量是否随新信息加入而单调改善,且在因子由数据估计、需要同时检验较多评价条件时,如何进行有效的单调性检验?
方法与思路
作者将多重矩不等式检验扩展到即时预测单调性,允许不等式数量随样本增长,并研究伪样本外方案中参数与因子估计误差的处理条件。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称,该检验形式化了既有即时预测评价程序,并处理高维估计误差;美国 GDP 及五个分项的应用中,政府支出是单调性的例外。
阅读关注点
核对单调性使用的预测损失与矩不等式、参数和因子估计误差可被处理的条件,以及伪样本外方案、信息发布顺序和检验设置。
阅读边界
摘要未说明损失函数、显著性水平与具体统计量;支持单调性不等于证明模型正确,政府支出结果也不能单独确认误设及其原因。

原文摘要

This article proposes a test to determine whether “big data” nowcasting methods, which have become an important tool to many public and private institutions, are monotonically improving as new information becomes available. The test is the first to formalize existing evaluation procedures from the nowcasting literature. We place particular emphasis on models involving estimated factors, since factor-based methods are a leading case in the high-dimensional empirical nowcasting literature, although our test is still applicable to small-dimensional set-ups like bridge equations and MIDAS models. Our approach extends a recent methodology for testing many moment inequalities to the case of nowcast monotonicity testing, which allows the number of inequalities to grow with the sample size. We provide results showing the conditions under which both parameter estimation error and factor estimation error can be accommodated in this high-dimensional setting when using the pseudo out-of-sample approach. The finite sample performance of our test is illustrated using a wide range of Monte Carlo simulations, and we conclude with an empirical application of nowcasting U.S. real gross domestic product (GDP) growth and five GDP sub-components. Our test results confirm monotonicity for all but one sub-component (government spending), suggesting that the factor-augmented model may be misspecified for this GDP constituent. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

笔记与分组