Rank-Based Tests for Randomness Against First-Order Serial Dependence
针对一阶序列依赖的基于秩的随机性检验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:摘要直接研究时间序列的一阶序列依赖、秩自相关及随机性检验。
针对一阶序列依赖的基于秩的随机性检验AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Optimal rank-based procedures were derived in Hallin, Ingenbleek, and Puri (1985, 1987) and Hallin and Puri (1988) for some fundamental testing problems arising in time series analysis. The optimality properties of these procedures are of an asymptotic nature, however, whereas much of the attractiveness of rank-based methods lies in their small-sample applicability and robustness features. Accordingly, the objective of this article is twofold: (a) a study of the finite-sample behavior of the asymptotically optimal tests for randomness against first-order autoregressive moving average dependence proposed in Hallin et al. (1985), both under the null hypothesis (tables of critical values) and under alternatives of serial dependence (evaluation of the power function), and (b) an (heuristic) investigation of the robustness properties of the proposed procedures (with emphasis on the identification problem in the presence of “outliers”). We begin (Sec. 2) with a brief description of the rank-based measures of serial dependence to be considered throughout: (a) Van der Waerden, (b) Wilcoxon, (c) Laplace, and (d) Spearman—Wald—Wolfowitz autocorrelations. The article is mainly concerned with first-order (lag 1) coefficients of these types. Tables of the critical values required for performing tests of randomness are provided (Sec. 3), and the finite-sample power of the resulting tests is compared with that of their parametric competitors (Sec. 4). Although the exact level of classical parametric procedures is only approximately correct (whereas the distribution-free rank tests are of the correct size), the proposed rank-based tests compare quite favorably with the classical ones, and appear to perform at least as well as (often strictly better than) their classical counterparts. The examples of Section 5 emphasize the robustness properties of rank-based tests with respect to departures from modeling assumptions, outliers, and gross errors (Secs. 5.1 and 5.3), as well as their insensitivity to spurious end effects (Sec. 5.2). Discrepancies between rank-based and the usual parametric tests also may provide an indication that an intervention analysis should be considered (Sec. 5.4), and rank-based correlograms may detect serial dependence in series where standard methods fail to do so (Sec. 5.5). These examples show how classical Gaussian methods that take normal white noise for granted can yield misleading diagnostic information—spurious autocorrelation or failure to detect significant serial dependencies—when the data have outliers, atypical start-up behavior, and so on. Rank-based tests exhibit much better resistance to aberrations of this type, and the conclusions drawn from the methods proposed here are thus likely to be more reliable in the model-identification process than those resulting from an inspection of traditional correlograms.