DIAGNOSTIC CHECKING FOR THE ADEQUACY OF NONLINEAR TIME SERIES MODELS
非线性时间序列模型充分性的诊断检验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:摘要研究时间序列残差诊断,明确覆盖 ARCH、条件方差模型并应用于股票指数。
非线性时间序列模型充分性的诊断检验AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
We propose a new diagnostic test for linear and nonlinear time series models, using a generalized spectral approach. Under a wide class of time series models that includes autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARCH) and autoregressive conditional duration (ACD) models, the proposed test enjoys the appealing “nuisance-parameter-free” property in the sense that model parameter estimation uncertainty has no impact on the limit distribution of the test statistic. It is consistent against any type of pairwise serial dependence in the model standardized residuals and allows the choice of a proper lag order via data-driven methods. Moreover, the new test is asymptotically more efficient than the correlation integral–based test of Brock, Hsieh, and LeBaron (1991, Nonlinear Dynamics, Chaos, and Instability: Statistical Theory and Economic Evidence) and Brock, Dechert, Scheinkman, and LeBaron (1996, Econometric Reviews 15, 197–235), the well-known BDS test, against a class of plausible local alternatives (not including ARCH). A simulation study compares the finite-sample performance of the proposed test and the tests of BDS, Box and Pierce (1970, Journal of the American Statistical Association 65, 1509–1527), Ljung and Box (1978, Biometrika 65, 297–303), McLeod and Li (1983, Journal of Time Series Analysis 4, 269–273), and Li and Mak (1994, Journal of Time Series Analysis 15, 627–636). The new test has good power against a wide variety of stochastic and chaotic alternatives to the null models for conditional mean and conditional variance. It can play a valuable role in evaluating adequacy of linear and nonlinear time series models. An empirical application to the daily S&P 500 price index highlights the merits of our approach.We thank the co-editor (Don Andrews) and two referees for careful and constructive comments that have lead to significant improvement over an earlier version. We also thank C.W.J. Granger, D. Tjøstheim, and Z. Xiao for helpful comments. Hong's participation is supported by the National Science Foundation via NSF grant SES–0111769. Lee thanks the UCR Academic Senate for research support.