Likelihood-Based Procedures for Threshold Diagnostics and Uncertainty in Extreme Value Modelling
极值建模中阈值诊断与不确定性的似然方法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:摘要研究通用极值阈值方法并应用于河流流量,未提供金融尾部或系统性风险研究的直接依据。
极值建模中阈值诊断与不确定性的似然方法AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Summary For extreme value modelling based on threshold techniques, a well-documented issue is the sensitivity of inference from the model to the choice of threshold. The threshold above which we assume a non-homogeneous Poisson process, or equivalently generalized Pareto representation, to be a reasonable approximation to the distribution is traditionally selected before analysis and subsequently treated as fixed and known. In doing so, the analyst cannot account for the subjective judgement that has already taken place before formal inference begins. We propose an asymptotically motivated model to account for uncertainty in choice of threshold, under assumptions generated by a penultimate form of extreme value theory. To assess the sensitivity of the conclusions to these assumptions, we additionally present a purely likelihood-based diagnostic for the choice of threshold, developing a non-standard likelihood ratio test which supplements the current suite of tools. We show that the likelihood ratio procedure quantifies evidence derived from traditional threshold diagnostic plots, and that the full model for threshold uncertainty identifies the same features as the diagnostic. We apply our procedures to both simulated data, and a data set of flow rates from the River Nidd.