Nonparametric Trending Regression with Cross-Sectional Dependence
|
|
- Clifton Jordan
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Nonparametric Trending Regression with Cross-Sectional Dependence Peter M. Robinson London School of Economics January 5, 00 Abstract Panel data, whose series length T is large but whose cross-section size N need not be, are assumed to have a common time trend. The time trend is of unknown form, the model includes additive, unknown, individual-speci c components, and we allow for spatial or other cross-sectional dependence and/or heteroscedasticity. A simple smoothed nonparametric trend estimate is shown to be dominated by an estimate which exploits the availability of cross-sectional data. Asymptotically optimal choices of bandwidth are justi ed for both estimates. Feasible optimal bandwidths, and feasible optimal trend estimates, are asymptotically justi ed, the nite sample performance of the latter being examined in a Monte Carlo study. A number of potential extensions are discussed. JEL Classi cations: C3; C4; C3 Keywords: Panel data; nonparametric time trend; cross-sectional dependence; generalized least squares; optimal bandwidth Tel ; fax: address: p.m.robinson@lse.ac.uk
2 . INTRODUCTION Much econometric modelling of nonstationary time series employs deterministic trending functions that are polynomial, indeed frequently linear. However the penalties of mis-specifying parametric functions are well appreciated, and nonparametric modelling is increasingly widely accepted, at least in samples of reasonable size. The inability of polynomials to satisfactorily globally approximate general functions of time deters study of polynomial functions whose order increases slowly with sample size, and rather leads one to consider the possibility of a smooth trend mapped into the unit interval and approximated by a smoothed kernel regression. For example, Starica and Granger (005) employed this approach in modelling series of stock prices. There is a huge literature on such xed-design nonparametric regression, principally in the setting of a single time series. Here we are concerned with panel data, where N series of length ave a common, nonparametric, time trend but also additive, xed, individual e ects, for which we have to correct before being able to form a trend estimate. We assume an asymptotic framework in which T is large; but not necessarily N; so that the cross-sectional mean at a given time point is not necessarily consistent for the trend, hence the recourse to smoothed nonparametric regression. A major feature of the paper is concern for possible cross-sectional correlation and/or heteroscedasticity. These in uence the asymptotic variance of our trend estimate, and thence also the mean squared error and consequent optimal rules for bandwidth choice. The availability of crosssectional data enables us to propose a trend estimate, based on the generalized least squares principle, that reduces the asymptotic variance. This estimate, along with its asymptotic variance (and that of the original trend estimate), depends on the cross-sectional covariance matrix. In general this is not wholly known, and possibly not known at all. Using residuals from the tted trend, we consistently estimate
3 its elements, so as to obtain a feasible improved trend estimate, and a consistent estimate of its variance, as well as feasible optimal bandwidths that are asymptotically equivalent to the infeasible versions. These results are valid with N remaining xed as T increases, and they continue to hold if N is also allowed to increase, in which case there is a faster rate of convergence, and in this latter situation our results hold irrespective of whether or not the covariance matrix is nitely parameterized. Section describes the basic model. In Section 3 we present a simple trend estimate and its mean squared error properties. Improved estimation is discussed in Section 4. In Section 5 optimal bandwidths are reported. Section 6 suggests estimates of the cross-sectional covariance matrix, with asymptotic justi ication for their insertion in the optimal bandwidths and improved trend estimates. Section 7 suggests some directions for further research. Proof details may be found in two appendices.. PANEL DATA NONPARAMETRIC MODEL We observe y it, i = ; :::; N, t = ; :::; T, generated by y it = i + t + x it ; (.) where the i and t are unknown constants, and the x it are unobservable zero-mean random variables, uncorrelated and homoscedastic across time, but possibly correlated and heteroscedastic over the cross section. Thus we impose Assumption For all i; t, E(x it ) = 0; (.) for all i; j; t there exist nite constants! ij such that E (x it x jt ) =! ij ; (.3) and for all i; j; t; u, E (x it x ju ) = 0; t 6= u: (.4) 3
4 Our focus is on estimating the time trend. Super cially this is represented in (.) by t, but the i and t are identi ed only up to location shift. To resolve this problem we initially impose the (arbitrary) restriction NX i = 0: (.5) i= An immediate consequence of (.5) is the relationship y At = t + x At ; (.6) de ning the cross-sectional means x At = N N X X N x it ; y At = N y it : (.7) i= i= We use the A subscript to denote averaging, in (.7) with respect to i and subsequently also with respect to t. In view of (.) an obvious estimate of t is thus t = y At : (.8) This can be a good estimate if N is large. For any xed t, it is trivially seen that t is mean-square consistent for t if lim N!N NX NX! ij = 0: (.9) i= j= Condition (.9) is trivially satis ed if the x it are uncorrelated over i, but more generally if cross-sectional dependence is limited by the condition lim N! N NX NX! ij < : (.0) i= j= We mention (.0) because it is analogous to a common weak dependence condition for time series, indeed it would correspond to an extension of the latter condition to stationary spatial lattice processes. Also (.0) is slightly weaker than Condition C.3 4
5 of Bai and Ng (00), in a di erent panel data context. The more general condition (.9) permits a type of cross-sectional long range dependence. While it can also cover certain models including additive factors, (.9) does not, however, hold for factor models in which the x it, for all i, are in uenced by the same factor or factors. For this reason, and because we do not wish to model the t in terms of nitely many parameters (as would be the case for a polynomial trend, say), we use nonparametric smoothing across time which requires T to be large, but not necessarily N. In order to achieve consistent estimates we assume the existence of a function (), 0, that is suitably smooth, such that t = (t=t ); t = ; :::; T: (.) The T -dependent argument in (.) enables information to be borrowed so as to permit consistent estimation of () for any xed as T!. Thus t, and hence in turn y it, should be regarded as triangular arrays, i.e. t = tt, y it = y itt, but for ease of notation we suppress reference to the T -subscript. Also, though our work is relevant in part to the case of a xed N (as T! ), we also allow N! (slowly, as T! ). In the latter circumstances, the i should also be regarded as triangular arrays, i = in, in view of the restriction (.5), and this would imply dependence of the y it on N also, though again we suppress reference to an N subscript. In terms of practical applications, on the other hand, one envisages data for which T is much larger than N, one example being many frequent time series observations on a relatively modest number of stock prices. Smoothed nonparametric estimation has been considered previously in a panel data setting. For example, Ruckstuhl, Welsh and Carroll (000) considered a model in which t is replaced by a nonparametric function of a stochastic explanatory variable, which can vary across both i and t, the i are stochastic, and independent and homoscedastic across i; t, and N is xed. Thus there is an explicit factor structure 5
6 built in, with no other source of cross-sectional dependence (and no heteroscedasticity). We discuss a factor structure for x it but as a special case only, and here as elsewhere we consider the possibility that N, like T; diverges. Also, Hart and Wehrly (986) considered the special case of (.) with no individual-speci c e ects, i.e. i 0, and with no cross-sectional correlation or heteroscedasticity. A deterministic nonparametric trend also features in the panel data partly linear semiparametric regression models considered by Severini and Stanisvalis (994), Moyeed and Diggle (994), for example. 3. SIMPLE TREND ESTIMATION We introduce a kernel function k(u), < u <, satisfying Z k(u)du = ; (3.) and a positive scalar bandwidth h = h T. Then with the abbreviation T t k t = k ; (3.) de ne the estimate ~() = k t y At = t= k t ; (0; ): (3.3) t= Important measures of goodness of nonparametric estimates, which lead to optimal choices of bandwidth h, are mean squared error, i.e. and mean integrated squared error, i.e. n o n o MSE ~() = E ~() () ; (3.4) n o MISE ~ = Z 0 E n ~(u) (u) o du: (3.5) 6
7 To approximate these we require conditions on ; k and h. Assumption () is twice continuously di erentiable, 0. Assumption 3 k(u) satis es (3.) and is even, non-negative, and twice boundedly di erentiable at all but possibly nitely many points, k(u) and its derivative k 0 (u) = (d=du)k(u) satisfying k(u) = O ( + u 4 ), k 0 (u) = O ( + juj c ) ; some c > : (3.6) Assumption 4 As T! h + ()! 0: (3.7) The smoothness condition on in Assumption could be relaxed at cost of inferior optimal rates of convergence, or on the other hand strengthened, which would lead to better rates if Assumption 3 were modi ed to permit higher order kernels; in any case the non-negativity condition on k is imposed only to simplify proofs. Assumption 4 is as usual a minimal condition for consistent estimation. De ne the N N cross-sectional disturbance covariance matrix ; having (i; j) th element! ij (see Assumption ), de ne by ` the N vector of s, and also de ne = Z k (u)du; = Z u k(u)du; (3.8) () = 00 (), = Z 00 (u) du; (3.9) where 00 (u) = (d =du ) (u): 0 Assumption 5 () > 0, > 0: 7
8 Theorem Let Assumptions -5 hold. Then as T! n o MSE ~() n o MISE ~ `0` N + () h 4 ; 4 (3.0) `0` N + h 4 : 4 (3.) Theorem contains nothing new in itself, for xed N; `0`=N being just the variance of the dependent variable y At in the nonparametric regression. Versions of this result were given long ago, e.g. by Benedetti (977), though conditions employed in Theorem are essentially taken from Robinson (997), and no proof is required. Hart and Wehrly (986) also considered nonparametric regression of cross-sectional means in a panel data setting, but without allowing for individual-speci c e ects. However, the availability of cross-sectional data o ers the possibility of improved estimation, in terms of variance-reduction, as explored in the following section. 4. IMPROVED TREND ESTIMATION Improved estimation of the trend requires it to be identi ed in a di erent way from that in Section, in particular to shift its location. Consider the representation y it = (w) i + (w) t + x it ; (4.) where the bracketed superscript w represents a vector w = (w ; :::; w n ) 0 of weights, such that w 0` = ; (4.) w 0 (w) = 0; (4.3) where ` is a N vector of s. This represents a generalisation of (.), (.5), in which w = (=N; :::; =N) 0. It is convenient to write (4.), for i = ; :::; N, in 8
9 N-dimensional column vector form as where (w) = 6 4 (w). (w) N y t = (w) + (w) t ` + x t ; (4.4) ; x t = 6 4 x t. x Nt ; y t = 6 4 For given w consider a smooth function (w) () such that (w) t two weight vectors w a ; w b we have y t. y Nt : (4.5) = (w) (t=t ). For any (wa) + (wa) ()` = (w b) + () (w b)`: (4.6) Thus (w b) () = (wa) () + w 0 b (wa) ; (4.7) (w b) = (wa) + (wa) () (wb) () ` where I N is the N N identity matrix. The location shift in (w b) t = (I N `w 0 b) (wa) ; (4.8) relative to (wa) t is thus +w 0 b (wa) (and that in (w b) i relative to (wa) i is w 0 b (wa), for each i). However, the time trend is scale- and shape-invariant to choice of w. Moreover, de ning the estimate e (w) () = k t w 0 y :t = t= we have, with as de ned in Section, n o E ~ (w) () (w) () = = t= k t ; (4.9) t= n (w) (t=t ) o (w) () k t = f(t=t ) ()g k t = t= 9 t= k t k t (4.0) t=
10 for any w, so bias is invariant to w. Thus, n o n MSE ~ (w) () = E ~ (w) () ()o (w) (4.) and MISE n ~ (w) o = Z E n ~ (w) (u) (w) (u)o du (4.) 0 are a ected by w only through the variance. This is approximated by the leading term on the right sides of (4.3) and (4.4) in Theorem below, which requires the additional Assumption 6 is non-singular. Theorem Let Assumptions -6 hold. Then as T!, n o MSE ~ (w) () (w0 w) n o MISE ~ (w) (w0 w) + h4 (); (4.3) 4 + h4 : (4.4) 4 Again no proof is needed. The bias contributions in Theorems and are identical as discussed above, or alternatively due to and having identical second derivatives. The right hand sides of (4.3) and (4.4) are minimized, subject to (4.), by w = w, where w = `0 `; (4.5) For notational ease denote () = (w) () = () + (`0 )=(`0 `); ~() = ~ (w ) (). Disregarding the vertical shift, ~() can be said to be at least as good an estimate as ~ (). We have w 0 w = `0 ` : (4.6) 0
11 Thus the asymptotic variance, and MSE and MISE, of ~ () equal those of ~() when `0` N = `0 `: (4.7) This is true if has an eigenvector `. One such situation of interest arises when the cross-sectional dependence in x it is described by a spatial autoregressive model with row- and column-normalized weight matrix: in particular, x t = W x :t + " :t ; (4.8) where " :t is an N vector of zero-mean uncorrelated, homoscedastic random variables (with variance constant also across T ); the scalar ( ; ); and W is an N N matrix with zero diagonal elements and satisfying W ` = W 0` = `. In practice elements of W are a measure of inverse economic distance between the corresponding elements of x :t. Thus W is often, though not always, symmetric, in which case if one of the latter equalities holds, so do both. This is the case in the familiar "farmers-districts" setting in which W is block-diagonal with symmetric blocks, including spatial correlation across farmers within a district, but not across districts. However, if W is non-symmetric, and only row-normalized, ~() is better than ~ (). As another example, suppose x it has factor structure such that = ai N + bb 0 (4.9) where the scalar a > 0 and b is an N non-null vector. Then `0` = a (`0b) N N + N ; (4.0) (`0 `) (`0b) = a N ; (4.) a + b 0 b and (4.7) holds if and only if b is proportional to `, i.e. if all factor weights are identical. Another simple example in which (4.7) holds is when there is no crosssectional dependence in x it but not all variances! ii are identical.
12 In terms of the impact on (4.3) and (4.4) of N increasing in the asymptotic theory, note that `0 ` N= kk ; denoting by kak the square root of the greatest eigenvalue of A 0 A. Thus if kk increases more slowly than N (it cannot increase faster) the variance components of (4.3) and (4.4) decrease faster than if N were xed, indeed if kk remains bounded the variance rate is (N) ; and the latter property holds even in the factor case (4.9), where kk increases at rate N but, as (4.) indicates, (`0 `) = O(N ) if lim N! (`0b) = fn(a + b 0 b)g < ; (4.) where the expression whose upper limit is taken is clearly less than for all xed N (by the Cauchy inequality), but converges to as N! if, say, b is proportional to `; essentially the requirement for (6.7) to hold for this factor model is one of su cient variability in the factor weights. 5. OPTIMAL BANDWIDTH CHOICE A key question in implementing either ~ or ~ is the choice of bandwidth h. Choices that are optimal in the sense of minimizing asymptotic MSE or MISE are conventional. The following theorem di ers only from well known results in indicating the dependence of the optimal choices on and N; and so again no proof is given. Theorem 3 Let Assumptions -5 hold. MISE of ~ are respectively h ;MSE () = h ;MISE = The h minimizing asymptotic MSE and `0` =5 T N = () ; (5.) =5 : (5.) `0` T N =
13 Let Assumption 6 also hold. The h minimizing asymptotic MSE and MISE of ~ are respectively ( =5 (`0 `) h ;MSE () = = ()) ; (5.3) T ( =5 (`0 `) h ;MISE = = ) : (5.4) T For xed N, these optimal h all have the conventional T =5 rate. If N is regarded as increasing also then unless (.9) does not hold the rates of (5.) and (5.), and thus (5.3) and (5.4) (in view of (4.5)), are of smaller order. In any case (4.5) implies generally smaller optimal bandwidths for ~ than. ~ 6. FEASIBLE OPTIMAL BANDWIDTH CHOICE AND TREND ESTIMATION In practice the optimal bandwidths of the previous section cannot be computed. The constants and are trivially calculated, but () and are unknown. Discussion of their estimation can be found in the nonparametric smoothing literature, see e.g. Gasser, Kneip and Kohler (99), and there is nothing about our setting to require additional treatment here, apart from the improved estimation possible by averaging over the cross section. More notable is the need to approximate the partly or wholly unknown. This arises also if, instead of employing a plug-in proxy to the optimal bandwidths of the previous section, some automatic method such as crossvalidation is employed. Estimation of is also required in order to form a feasible version of the optimal trend estimate ~() In the simplest realistic situation, of no cross-sectional heteroscedasticity or dependence, =!I N, with! unknown, in which case ~() (). ~ More generally we have a parametric structure permitting dependence and/or heteroscedasticity, such as in 3
14 the examples of the previous section. Of course if N remains xed as T increases, is by de nition parametric, so there is no theoretical loss in regarding as an unrestricted positive de nite N N matrix. If then N is allowed to increase this corresponds to a nonparametric treatment of. In all cases is estimated by means of residuals. It is natural to base the residuals on the originally parameterized model (.), but there is a choice of residuals depending on whether or not N is regarded as increasing with T, and, if it does, on the properties of the sequence as N increases. De ne the temporal means x ia = T and the overall means x AA = N x it ; y ia = T y it ; (6.) t= N X x ia ; y AA = N t= N X i= i= y ia : (6.) Then we have, using (.5), y it y ia + y AA = t + x it x ia + x AA : (6.3) Employing also (.6) gives y it y ia y At + y AA = x it x ia x At + x AA : (6.4) This suggests the residual ~x it = y it y ia y At + y AA : (6.5) Clearly x ia = O p (T ) uniformly in i and x AA = O p (T ), helping to justify (6.5). However, it is necessary also that x At = o p () and this requires N!, and, as discussed previously, will not hold even then in models such as (4.9) due to the strength of the cross-sectional dependence. Moreover, a satisfactory convergence rate 4
15 may be required in order to show that the optimal bandwidth, and ~(), are suitably closely approximated. Thus, instead of considering (6.5) further, we rely solely on T being large and in view of (6.3) consider instead the residual ^x it = y it y ia t ~ + y AA ; (6.6) where ~ t = ~ (t=t ). Thus estimate! ij by ^! ij = T ^x it^x jt : (6.7) t= We strengthen Assumption 4 to Assumption 7 As T! ; h + T h 3! 0: (6.8) Theorem 4 Let Assumptions -3, 6 and 7 hold. Then as T! E j^! ij! ij j = O h 3 + h3= + ; (6.9) T uniformly in i and j. The proof appears in Appendix A. Now de ne ^ to be the N N matrix with (i; j)-th element ^! ij, and consider the replacement of by ^ in the optimal bandwidths (5.)-(5.4). For completeness we also assume estimates of ^(), ^ of (), respectively. Notice that from Theorem 4 ^ ( X N i= NX j= (^! ij! ij ) ) = O p Nh 3 + Nh3= + N : (6.0) T 5
16 Assumption 8 ^() () = O p kk ^ ; ^ = O p kk ^ : (6.) Assumption 8 is expressed in a somewhat unprimitive way, but the order in (6.0) is actually what is required to ensure that the e ect of estimating bias is negligible, and as the bias issue is of very secondary importance here we do not go into details about the rates attainable by a particular estimate. However the rate would depend inter alia on the rate of decay of a bandwidth (not necessarily h) used in the nonparametric estimation of 00, or more particularly, in view of (6.), on its rate relative to that of h: Note that if N remains xed as T increases the rate in (6.) must be O p h 3 + h 3= T + ; whereas if N increases then the latter rate is still relevant in, for example, the factor case (4.9), but if kk does not increase or increases more slowly than N; then (6.) entails a milder restriction. De ne ^h ;MSE () = ^h ;MISE = ^h ;MSE () = ^h ;MISE = ( ) =5 ^` `0 T =^() ; (6.) ( ) =5 ^` `0 T =^ ; (6.3) ( (`0 ^ `) ) =5 = ^() ; (6.4) T ( (`0 ^ `) ^) =5 = : (6.5) T Assumption 9 If N! as T! then Nh 3 + Nh3= T + N! 0: (6.6) Assumption 0 If N! as T! then N`0 ` + = O(): (6.7) (`0 `) 6
17 Boundedness of the rst term on the left is equivalent to having smallest eigenvalue that is bounded away from zero for su ciently large N, as in Assumption 6. By the Cauchy inequality, the second term on the left of (6.7) is no less than, so it cannot converge to zero. On the other hand, since `0 ` `0 ` max k k ; N kk ; (6.8) it follows that if also the greatest eigenvalue of is bounded, the second term on the left of (6.7) is also bounded. But the greatest eigenvalue of can diverge with N, as in the factor example (4.9), whereas (6.7) may be held even in this case. To see this, note that `0 ` = a fn (4.) it is su cient that (4.) holds. (`0b) (a + b 0 b) =(a + b 0 b) g = O(N); so in view of Theorem 5 Let Assumptions -3 and 5-0 hold. N! also, Then as T!, and possibly ^h ;MSE () h ;MSE () ; ^h;mise h ;MISE ; The proof is in Appendix A. ^h ;MSE () h ;MSE () ; ^h;mise h ;MISE! p : (6.9) We can also use ^ to obtain a feasible version of ~(), namely `0 ^ ^() = `0 ^ ` k t y t = k t : (6.0) t= t= Theorem indicates that ~() () = O e (`0 `) () + h! ; (6.) where O e denotes an exact stochastic order. It is of interest to show that ^() achieves the same asymptotic MSE as ~(), in other words that ~() ~() is of smaller order than (6.). For this purpose we introduce: 7
18 Assumption If N! as T! then Nh + N! 0: (6.) Theorem 6 Let Assumptions -4 and 5- hold. Then as T!, and possibly N! also, (`0 `)! ^() ~() = o p + h : (6.3) () The proof is in Appendix A. 7. MONTE CARLO STUDY OF FINITE SAMPLE PERFORMANCE As always when large sample asymptotic results are presented, the issue of nitesample relevance arises. In the present case, one interesting question is the extent to which ^() matches the e ciency of ~(), and whether it is actually better than (), ~ given the sampling error in estimating. We study this question by Monte Carlo simulations in the case where has the factor structure (4.9). In (.), we thus take x it = b i i + p a" it ; (7.) where the i and " it have mean zero and variance, and there is independence throughout the f i ; i = ; :::; " it ; i; t = ; ; :::g, more particularly we take the i, " it to be normally distributed. We tried various values of a (a = ; ; ) and set the b i factor weights by rst generating b ; :::; b N independently from a normal distribution, but then keeping them xed across replications; in particular we considered the three choices b N (0; I N ), N (0; 5I N ) and N(0; 0I N ). With respect to the deterministic component of (.), we took (u) = ( + u ) throughout and xed the individual e ects i by rst generating ; :::; N independently from the standard normal distribution, then taking N = ::: N in order to satisfy (.5), then keeping 8
19 these i xed across replications. The estimates ~ (), ~() and ^() were computed at points = ; ; 3. For k we used the uniform kernel on [ ; ], and the band- 4 4 width values used were h = 0:; 0:5;. Two (N; T ) combinations employed, (5; 00) and (0; 500). Monte Carlo MSE, "\MSE" in Tables -3, was computed in each case, based on 000 replications. In Table V ar b i =, in Table V ar b i = 5, and in Table 3 V ar b i = 0. (Tables -3 about here) When (N; T ) = (5; 00) it was found that in every case ^ had larger \MSE than ~ but smaller \MSE than ~. However, when (N; T ) = (0; 500) ^ was always worse than ^ when the b i were generated from a distribution with variance, though when the latter variance was increased to 5 ^ was better in nearly half of the cases (3 out of 7), and when this variance was 0 ^ was worse than ~ in only one case. It would appear that these results re ect the fact that the di erence between variances of ~ and ^, namely `0` `0 ` ; (7.) N has to be large enough relative to the variability increase due to estimation of, in order for ^ to beat ~. In some sense the farther away is from an identity matrix the better for ^ s relative performance, explaining why a large variance in generating the b i helps, though for given such variance increasing N hurts ^ relatively (despite the helpful simultaneous increase of T ). The above description of the results is not informative of the extent to which ^ and ~ are close, or to whether ^ beats or is beaten by ~, and Tables -3 reveal these details. As a increases so does the variance of ~, so again the potential for ^ to improve over ~ is reduced, and the tables illustrate this. For (N; T ) = (5; 00), ^ s performance is often very roughly midway between those of ^ and ~. Also for (N; T ) = (5; 00), \MSE is often U-shaped in h in Tables and, and also for ~ and ^ in Table 3, but 9
20 tends to be decreasing in h for ~ in Table 3. The pattern of performance relative to h is less clear when (N; T ) = (0; 500). In these simulations we have not pursued the discussion of optimal bandwidth choice (see Theorem 3) by incorporating feasible optimal bandwidths (as justi ed in Theorem 5). Some discussion of this issue was presented in Section 6, but a more explicit one is included in the following sequence of steps. Given use of a twice di erenciable k, a feasible ^h ;MISE (6.3) can be computed (or approximated, perhaps by cross-validation), and employed in place of h in the estimate () ~ (3.3). Then the residuals (6.6) are calculated, followed by ^, using (6.7). Finally, ^h ;MISE (6.3) is computed and used in the estimate ^() (6.0). 8. FURTHER DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH. Our asymptotic variance formulae for ^() and ^() appear also in central limit theorems, under some additional conditions, indeed one could develop joint central limit theorems for both () ~ and ~() at nitely many, r, xed frequencies ; :::; r, with asymptotic independence across the i. When the bias is negligible relative to the standard deviation, the convergence rate will be () when N is xed, and faster if N is allowed to increase with T. We could also develop a central limit theorem for ^( i ), i = ; :::; r, giving the same limit distribution.. The assumption of regular spacing across t is easily relaxed with some regularity conditions on the spacings, since much of the xed-design nonparametric regression estimation literature permits this. 3. Temporal correlation can also be introduced. For example, suppose X x t = A j " t j ; (8.) 0 j=0
21 where the " t are uncorrelated with covariance matrix I N, and the N N matrix A j satis es Then as T!, where X A j z j 6= 0; jzj = ; (8.) j=0 X ka j k < : (8.3) j=0 n o V ar ~() `0f(0)` N f(0) =! X A j j=0 (8.4)! 0 X A j ; (8.5) which is proportional to the value of the spectral density matrix of x t at frequency zero. Likewise as T! j=0 (`0f(0) `) V ar fe()g : (8.6) We can consistently estimate f(0) by procedures of smoothed probability density estimation, and thence extend the results of Section We could proceed further by relaxing (8.3) to permit long memory, or on the other hand relax (8.) to permit antipersistence. Relevant variance formula for univariate xed-design regression with long memory or antipersistent disturbances can be found in Robinson (997), whose results can be extended to our otherwise more general setting, one further issue arising being the possibility of varying memory parameters over the cross-section. 5. Unknown individual-speci c multiplicative e ects can also be incorporated. To extend (.), y t = + t + x t ; (8.7)
22 where is an N unknown vector. Since the scale, as well as location, of t is not xed we need a normalization restriction on. Imposing `0 = N; (8.8) in addition to (.5), we readily see that () ~ retains the properties described in Theorem. However, improving on () ~ along the lines discussed in Section 4 is more problematic. It was seen in Section 4 that changing w does not change the bias of ~ (w) () as an estimate of (w) (), and changes the asymptotic variance by a factor that depends only on w. But consider any (w) ; (w) ; (w) (), where w 0 (w) = 0; w 0 (w) = (8.9) and We deduce that and thence + () = (w) + (w) (w) (): (8.0) (w) () = w 0 + (w 0 )() (8.) (w) w = I 0 N ; (8.) w 0 (w) = w 0 : (8.3) Then the bias n o E ~ (w) () (w) () = t= o k t n (w) (t=t ) (w) () = = (w 0 )BIAS t= k t n ~ (w) () o ; (8.4) n o where BIAS ~ (w) () is (4.0). Thus, varying w changes the bias by a factor which re ects the unknown multiplicative e ects, so the incorporation of these complicates the study of optimal trend estimation.
23 6. Analogous methods and theory could be developed for corresponding models in which the regressor in the nonparametric function is stochastic (and possibly multivariate), rather than deterministic. Robinson (007) considers static stochastic-design nonparametric regression but without distinguishing between a time and cross-sectional dimension, and without individual e ects, but his conditions on spatial dependence in regressors and disturbances are quite general and could be employed in more general settings, such as that just envisaged. Appendix A: Proofs of Theorems Proof of Theorem 4 We have (^x it^x jt (x it x jt! ij ) : (A.) ^! ij! ij = T x it x jt ) + T t= t= The second term on the right has mean zero and variance bounded by CT, where C throughout denotes a generic constant (so in the present case there is uniformity in i and j). From (6.3) and (6.6) we may write ^x it = x it + d i + e t ; (A.) where d i = x AA x ia ; e t = t ~ t : (A.3) Then ^x it^x jt x it x jt = (^x it x it ) (^x jt x jt ) + x it (^x jt x jt ) + (^x it x it ) x jt = (d i + e t ) (d j + e t ) + x it (d j + e t ) + (d i + e t ) x jt : (A.4) The rst term on the right of (A.4) is bounded in absolute value by d i + d j + e t. From Assumption, E(d i ) CT uniformly in i. Next write e t = f t =k t m t =k t ; (A.5) 3
24 where f t = () k st ( t s ); (A.6) s= m t = () k st x As ; s= k t = () k st : s= (A.7) (A.8) By Lemma 3, jk t j C uniformly in t and T. Next, m t has mean zero and variance bounded by C() kst C() ; applying Lemma. By the mean value theorem s t s t = 0 t + s t 00 T T st; s= (A.9) (A.0) where 0 t = 0 (t=t ) and j 00 stj C: Thus jf t j j 0 s t s tj () k st + () T T s= s= t jk st 00 stj : (A.) The last term is O(h ) by Lemma. The rst factor of the rst term on the right is uniformly bounded and the second factor may be written Z h s t () k st uk(u)du : s= (A.) From Lemma this is bounded by ( Ch + T h + 3 t T + t ) (A.3) for t T. For other t we use the bound Ch from Lemma. It follows 4
25 from Lemma 3 that f t =k t has the same bounds. Thus T t= ft Thus, for large T, k t C + C C h 3 + ( E T C t= T + T 4 h + h 4 T T + T 4 h + h : 4 T h 3 + T + T 4 h 4 d i + d j + e t ) C Next, looking at the second term in (A.4) we have E d j T x it t= ( Ed j T! X (t=) t : (A.4) h 3 + : (A.5) t= ) E x it CT : (A.6) Also E T ( x it f t =k t C T t= C T t= ft k t ) h 3= + T + T h : (A.7) Write Thus m t E x it k t t= x it m t = k(0) x itx At + x it k(0) E t= >< >: E x it x At k t t= k st x As : s= s6=t x it k t 9 > = C k st x As A >; s= s6=t (A.8) : (A.9) 5
26 The rst term on the right is bounded by C=(T h). The second term is C 8 >< >: E t= t= s= x it k t k sv 0 9 > = C k st x As A >; s= s6=t! C=h + E 0 t= v= v6=t ktv x it x Av x iv x At C k t k v A (A.0) by Lemma. It follows that E T x it m t =k t C=( ): t= (A.) Thus, E j^! ij! ij j C h C h 3= + T T + T h C h 3 + h3= + T + C : (A.) The proof is completed. Proof of Theorem 5 It su ces to consider only the MISE-optimal bandwidths, the proofs for the MSE-optimal ones being identical. We have 8 =5 < ^h ;MISE h ;MISE = T N : `0 ^` ^! =5 `0` 9 = ; =5 : (A.3) By the mean value theorem, the last factor is bounded in absolute value by 5 j~r j `0 ^ ` + 5 j~r j ^ ; (A.4) where ~r lies between (`0`) 4=5 =5 and (`0 ^`) 4=5^ =5 and ~r lies between (`0`) =5 6=5 6
27 6=5 and (`0 ^`) =5^. Then straightforwardly we deduce that (A.4) is n o (`0`) 4=5 N ^ + (`0`) ^ = O p N =5 ^ + kk ^ = O p N =5 ^ (A.5) by Assumption 8. Thus (A.3) is =5 `0` N =5 ^! O p T N `0`! =5 `0` = O p ^ = o T N p (h ;MSE ) : (A.6) Next consider ^h ;MSE h ;MSE = T 8 =5 >< `0 ^ ` >: ^=5 =5 (`0 `) =5 =5 9 >= >; : (A.7) The last factor is bounded in absolute value by 5 j~s j `0 ^ ` `0 ` + 5 j~s j ^ ; (A.8) where ~s lies between (`0 `) 4=5 =5 and `0 ^ ` 4=5 =5 ^ and ~s lies between (`0 `) =5 6=5 and `0 ^ ` =5 6=5 ^. Now `0 ^ ` `0 ` `0 ^ ` `0 ^ ` (`0 `) `0 ^ ^ ` = `0 ^ ` (`0 `) (`0 `) = O p ^ (`0 `) 0 ^ = O A : (A.9) N 7
28 Thus (A.8) is O p `0 `4=5 ^ + `0 ` =5 ^ A N = O p (`0 N `) 4=5 ^ + kk ^! : (A.30) It follows from Assumption 8 that! 4=5 (`0 `) ^h ;MISE h ;MISE = O p ^ NT =5 = O p T `0 ` =5 ^ = o p (h ;MISE ) : (A.3) The proof is completed. Proof of Theorem 6 We have ( ^() ~() = = ( `0 ^ `0 ^ ` `0 ^ `0 ^ ` ) `0 `0 ` k t ( + t` + x t ) = t= t= ) `0 `0 ` k t ( + x t ) = k t : t= t= k t (A.3) It clearly su ces to show that the factor in braces has norm o p (`0 `) h + N (). This norm is bounded by `0 ^ `0 ^ ` `0 ` + `0 ` `0(^ ) : (A.33) From the proof of Theorem 5, 0 `0 ^ ` `0 ` ^ = A p ; N (A.34) 8
29 so since `0 ^ N ^ the rst term is Op N `0(^ ) = O p `0 ` ^ ^. Also, (A.35) and thus from Assumption 0 the second term has the same bound. This bound is O p `0 ` ^ O p `0 ` N h 3 + h3= T + : (A.36) Now Nh 3 = o(h ) if Nh! 0 and Nh 3= =T = o(h ) if N = o (). Also, N=( ) = o () if N = o(t ) but this is implied by the last condition. The conclusion follows. Appendix B: Technical Lemmas Lemma C ( + u c ). Then For given d 0 let the function g(u) be such that for c > d, jg(u)j max tt ( s t d ) s t g C: s= Proof. The expression in braces is bounded by C() d X js tju for any positive U. This is bounded by Choosing U gives the result. js tj d + C() c d X js tju (B.) js tj d c ; (B.) C() d U d+ + C() c d U d c+ : (B.3) Lemma Let the function g be twice boundedly di erentiable, and let g(u) = ( + juj c ) (B.4) 9
30 for c >, and let g(u) and its derivative g 0 (u) be integrable. Then for t, t T, s= s g t Z Proof. The left side is g(u)du C + T h + 3 (s Zt)= s= (s t )= Z g(u)du s t g Z t= g(u)du: c t T + g(u) du t c! : (B.5) (B.6) (B.7) (T t)= The rst integrand is s t s t g 0 u + s t g00 st where jgstj 00 C. Thus (B.6) is bounded in absolute value by s t () g0 + CT () C 3 + C T h ; 3 s= u ; (B.8) using Lemma. On the other hand (B.7) is bounded in absolute value by (B.9) T t C c + C c t : (B.0) Lemma 3 For all su ciently large T min k t =8: tt (B.) Proof. De ne t = Z (T t)=() k(u)du: (B.) t=() 30
31 Then The integrand is k t t = s= Z (T t)=() t=() s t s t k 0 k s t s t u + C t k(u) du: (B.3) u ; (B.4) where max C t < : tt Thus (B.3) is bounded in absolute value by () s t k0 + C t T () 3 C() + CT h 3 s= (B.5) =8; (B.6) say, for large enough T, using Lemma and Assumption 7. Now for large enough T, min t tt Z =(h) 0 k(u)du 4 (B.7) and thus min k t = min t tt tt max jk t t j > =8: (B.8) tt Acknowledgement This research was supported by ESRC Grant RES I am grateful for the helpful comments of a referee and Jungyoon Lee, and to the latter also for carrying out the simulations. 3
32 References Bai, J., S. Ng, 00. Determining the number of factors in approximate factor models. Econometrica 70, 9-. Benedetti, J.K., 977. On the nonparametric estimation of regression functions. Journal of the Royal Statisticl Society Series B39, Gasser, T., A. Kneip, W. Kohler, 99. A exible and fast method for automatic smoothing. Journal of the American Statistical Association 86, Hart, J.D., T.E. Wehrly, 986. Kernel regression estimation using repeated measurements data. Journal of the American Statistical Association 8, Moyeed, K.A., P.J. Diggle, 994. Rates of convergence in semi-parametric modelling of longitudinal data. Australian Journal of Statistics 36, Robinson, P.M., 997. Large-sample inference for nonparametric regression with dependent errors. Annals of Statistics 5, Robinson, P.M., 007. Asymptotic properties of nonparametric regression with spatial data. Preprint. Ruckstuhl, A.F., A.H. Welsh, R.J. Carroll, 000. Nonparametric function estimation of the relationship between two repeatedly measured variables. Statistica Sinica 0, 5-7. Severini, T.A., J.G. Staniswalis, 994. Quasi-likelihood estimation in semiparametric models. Journal of the American Statistical Association 89, Starica, C., C. Granger, 005. Nonstationarities in stock returns. Review of Economics and Statistics 87,
Simple Estimators for Semiparametric Multinomial Choice Models
Simple Estimators for Semiparametric Multinomial Choice Models James L. Powell and Paul A. Ruud University of California, Berkeley March 2008 Preliminary and Incomplete Comments Welcome Abstract This paper
More informationParametric Inference on Strong Dependence
Parametric Inference on Strong Dependence Peter M. Robinson London School of Economics Based on joint work with Javier Hualde: Javier Hualde and Peter M. Robinson: Gaussian Pseudo-Maximum Likelihood Estimation
More informationTime Series Models and Inference. James L. Powell Department of Economics University of California, Berkeley
Time Series Models and Inference James L. Powell Department of Economics University of California, Berkeley Overview In contrast to the classical linear regression model, in which the components of the
More informationGMM estimation of spatial panels
MRA Munich ersonal ReEc Archive GMM estimation of spatial panels Francesco Moscone and Elisa Tosetti Brunel University 7. April 009 Online at http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/637/ MRA aper No. 637, posted
More informationSimple Estimators for Monotone Index Models
Simple Estimators for Monotone Index Models Hyungtaik Ahn Dongguk University, Hidehiko Ichimura University College London, James L. Powell University of California, Berkeley (powell@econ.berkeley.edu)
More informationGMM-based inference in the AR(1) panel data model for parameter values where local identi cation fails
GMM-based inference in the AR() panel data model for parameter values where local identi cation fails Edith Madsen entre for Applied Microeconometrics (AM) Department of Economics, University of openhagen,
More informationEstimating the Number of Common Factors in Serially Dependent Approximate Factor Models
Estimating the Number of Common Factors in Serially Dependent Approximate Factor Models Ryan Greenaway-McGrevy y Bureau of Economic Analysis Chirok Han Korea University February 7, 202 Donggyu Sul University
More informationNonparametric Identi cation and Estimation of Truncated Regression Models with Heteroskedasticity
Nonparametric Identi cation and Estimation of Truncated Regression Models with Heteroskedasticity Songnian Chen a, Xun Lu a, Xianbo Zhou b and Yahong Zhou c a Department of Economics, Hong Kong University
More information13 Endogeneity and Nonparametric IV
13 Endogeneity and Nonparametric IV 13.1 Nonparametric Endogeneity A nonparametric IV equation is Y i = g (X i ) + e i (1) E (e i j i ) = 0 In this model, some elements of X i are potentially endogenous,
More informationLECTURE 12 UNIT ROOT, WEAK CONVERGENCE, FUNCTIONAL CLT
MARCH 29, 26 LECTURE 2 UNIT ROOT, WEAK CONVERGENCE, FUNCTIONAL CLT (Davidson (2), Chapter 4; Phillips Lectures on Unit Roots, Cointegration and Nonstationarity; White (999), Chapter 7) Unit root processes
More informationSIMILAR-ON-THE-BOUNDARY TESTS FOR MOMENT INEQUALITIES EXIST, BUT HAVE POOR POWER. Donald W. K. Andrews. August 2011
SIMILAR-ON-THE-BOUNDARY TESTS FOR MOMENT INEQUALITIES EXIST, BUT HAVE POOR POWER By Donald W. K. Andrews August 2011 COWLES FOUNDATION DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 1815 COWLES FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS
More informationNotes on Time Series Modeling
Notes on Time Series Modeling Garey Ramey University of California, San Diego January 17 1 Stationary processes De nition A stochastic process is any set of random variables y t indexed by t T : fy t g
More informationECONOMETRICS FIELD EXAM Michigan State University May 9, 2008
ECONOMETRICS FIELD EXAM Michigan State University May 9, 2008 Instructions: Answer all four (4) questions. Point totals for each question are given in parenthesis; there are 00 points possible. Within
More informationChapter 2. Dynamic panel data models
Chapter 2. Dynamic panel data models School of Economics and Management - University of Geneva Christophe Hurlin, Université of Orléans University of Orléans April 2018 C. Hurlin (University of Orléans)
More informationMarkov-Switching Models with Endogenous Explanatory Variables. Chang-Jin Kim 1
Markov-Switching Models with Endogenous Explanatory Variables by Chang-Jin Kim 1 Dept. of Economics, Korea University and Dept. of Economics, University of Washington First draft: August, 2002 This version:
More information1. The Multivariate Classical Linear Regression Model
Business School, Brunel University MSc. EC550/5509 Modelling Financial Decisions and Markets/Introduction to Quantitative Methods Prof. Menelaos Karanasos (Room SS69, Tel. 08956584) Lecture Notes 5. The
More informationIntroduction: structural econometrics. Jean-Marc Robin
Introduction: structural econometrics Jean-Marc Robin Abstract 1. Descriptive vs structural models 2. Correlation is not causality a. Simultaneity b. Heterogeneity c. Selectivity Descriptive models Consider
More information(Y jz) t (XjZ) 0 t = S yx S yz S 1. S yx:z = T 1. etc. 2. Next solve the eigenvalue problem. js xx:z S xy:z S 1
Abstract Reduced Rank Regression The reduced rank regression model is a multivariate regression model with a coe cient matrix with reduced rank. The reduced rank regression algorithm is an estimation procedure,
More informationInference about Clustering and Parametric. Assumptions in Covariance Matrix Estimation
Inference about Clustering and Parametric Assumptions in Covariance Matrix Estimation Mikko Packalen y Tony Wirjanto z 26 November 2010 Abstract Selecting an estimator for the variance covariance matrix
More informationRank Estimation of Partially Linear Index Models
Rank Estimation of Partially Linear Index Models Jason Abrevaya University of Texas at Austin Youngki Shin University of Western Ontario October 2008 Preliminary Do not distribute Abstract We consider
More informationA TIME SERIES PARADOX: UNIT ROOT TESTS PERFORM POORLY WHEN DATA ARE COINTEGRATED
A TIME SERIES PARADOX: UNIT ROOT TESTS PERFORM POORLY WHEN DATA ARE COINTEGRATED by W. Robert Reed Department of Economics and Finance University of Canterbury, New Zealand Email: bob.reed@canterbury.ac.nz
More information7 Semiparametric Methods and Partially Linear Regression
7 Semiparametric Metods and Partially Linear Regression 7. Overview A model is called semiparametric if it is described by and were is nite-dimensional (e.g. parametric) and is in nite-dimensional (nonparametric).
More informationInference on Trending Panel Data
Inference on rending Panel Data Peter M Robinson and Carlos Velasco London School of Economics and Universidad Carlos III de Madrid November 3, 15 Abstract Semiparametric panel data modelling and statistical
More informationMC3: Econometric Theory and Methods. Course Notes 4
University College London Department of Economics M.Sc. in Economics MC3: Econometric Theory and Methods Course Notes 4 Notes on maximum likelihood methods Andrew Chesher 25/0/2005 Course Notes 4, Andrew
More informationUniversity of Toronto
A Limit Result for the Prior Predictive by Michael Evans Department of Statistics University of Toronto and Gun Ho Jang Department of Statistics University of Toronto Technical Report No. 1004 April 15,
More informationEconometrics II. Nonstandard Standard Error Issues: A Guide for the. Practitioner
Econometrics II Nonstandard Standard Error Issues: A Guide for the Practitioner Måns Söderbom 10 May 2011 Department of Economics, University of Gothenburg. Email: mans.soderbom@economics.gu.se. Web: www.economics.gu.se/soderbom,
More informationChapter 1. GMM: Basic Concepts
Chapter 1. GMM: Basic Concepts Contents 1 Motivating Examples 1 1.1 Instrumental variable estimator....................... 1 1.2 Estimating parameters in monetary policy rules.............. 2 1.3 Estimating
More informationTests for Cointegration, Cobreaking and Cotrending in a System of Trending Variables
Tests for Cointegration, Cobreaking and Cotrending in a System of Trending Variables Josep Lluís Carrion-i-Silvestre University of Barcelona Dukpa Kim y Korea University May 4, 28 Abstract We consider
More informationDepartment of Econometrics and Business Statistics
ISSN 1440-771X Australia Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/depts/ebs/pubs/wpapers/ Exponential Smoothing: A Prediction Error Decomposition Principle Ralph
More informationLecture Notes on Measurement Error
Steve Pischke Spring 2000 Lecture Notes on Measurement Error These notes summarize a variety of simple results on measurement error which I nd useful. They also provide some references where more complete
More informationLikelihood Ratio Based Test for the Exogeneity and the Relevance of Instrumental Variables
Likelihood Ratio Based est for the Exogeneity and the Relevance of Instrumental Variables Dukpa Kim y Yoonseok Lee z September [under revision] Abstract his paper develops a test for the exogeneity and
More informationNonparametric Identi cation of a Binary Random Factor in Cross Section Data
Nonparametric Identi cation of a Binary Random Factor in Cross Section Data Yingying Dong and Arthur Lewbel California State University Fullerton and Boston College Original January 2009, revised March
More informationTesting for Panel Cointegration Using Common Correlated Effects Estimators
Department of Economics Testing for Panel Cointegration Using Common Correlated Effects Estimators Department of Economics Discussion Paper 5-2 Anindya Banerjee Josep Lluís Carrion-i-Silvestre Testing
More informationSIMILAR-ON-THE-BOUNDARY TESTS FOR MOMENT INEQUALITIES EXIST, BUT HAVE POOR POWER. Donald W. K. Andrews. August 2011 Revised March 2012
SIMILAR-ON-THE-BOUNDARY TESTS FOR MOMENT INEQUALITIES EXIST, BUT HAVE POOR POWER By Donald W. K. Andrews August 2011 Revised March 2012 COWLES FOUNDATION DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 1815R COWLES FOUNDATION FOR
More informationA New Approach to Robust Inference in Cointegration
A New Approach to Robust Inference in Cointegration Sainan Jin Guanghua School of Management, Peking University Peter C. B. Phillips Cowles Foundation, Yale University, University of Auckland & University
More informationDevelopments in the Analysis of Spatial Data
Developments in the Analysis of Spatial Data P. M. Robinson London School of Economics August 31, 2007 The Suntory Centre Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines
More informationTesting the null of cointegration with structural breaks
Testing the null of cointegration with structural breaks Josep Lluís Carrion-i-Silvestre Anàlisi Quantitativa Regional Parc Cientí c de Barcelona Andreu Sansó Departament of Economics Universitat de les
More informationNonparametric Spectrum Estimation for Spatial Data. P.M. Robinson. London School of Economics
Nonparametric Spectrum Estimation for Spatial Data.M. Robinson London School of Economics The Suntory Centre Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines London School
More informationTesting for Regime Switching: A Comment
Testing for Regime Switching: A Comment Andrew V. Carter Department of Statistics University of California, Santa Barbara Douglas G. Steigerwald Department of Economics University of California Santa Barbara
More informationPanel cointegration rank testing with cross-section dependence
Panel cointegration rank testing with cross-section dependence Josep Lluís Carrion-i-Silvestre y Laura Surdeanu z September 2007 Abstract In this paper we propose a test statistic to determine the cointegration
More informationTesting for a Trend with Persistent Errors
Testing for a Trend with Persistent Errors Graham Elliott UCSD August 2017 Abstract We develop new tests for the coe cient on a time trend in a regression of a variable on a constant and time trend where
More informationECONOMETRICS II (ECO 2401S) University of Toronto. Department of Economics. Spring 2013 Instructor: Victor Aguirregabiria
ECONOMETRICS II (ECO 2401S) University of Toronto. Department of Economics. Spring 2013 Instructor: Victor Aguirregabiria SOLUTION TO FINAL EXAM Friday, April 12, 2013. From 9:00-12:00 (3 hours) INSTRUCTIONS:
More informationCointegration and the joint con rmation hypothesis
Cointegration and the joint con rmation hypothesis VASCO J. GABRIEL Department of Economics, Birkbeck College, UK University of Minho, Portugal October 2001 Abstract Recent papers by Charemza and Syczewska
More informationWhen is it really justifiable to ignore explanatory variable endogeneity in a regression model?
Discussion Paper: 2015/05 When is it really justifiable to ignore explanatory variable endogeneity in a regression model? Jan F. Kiviet www.ase.uva.nl/uva-econometrics Amsterdam School of Economics Roetersstraat
More informationA formal statistical test for the number of factors in. the approximate factor models
A formal statistical test for the number of factors in the approximate factor models Alexei Onatski Economics Department, Columbia University September 26, 2006 Abstract In this paper we study i.i.d. sequences
More informationEconomics 241B Review of Limit Theorems for Sequences of Random Variables
Economics 241B Review of Limit Theorems for Sequences of Random Variables Convergence in Distribution The previous de nitions of convergence focus on the outcome sequences of a random variable. Convergence
More informationApplications of Subsampling, Hybrid, and Size-Correction Methods
Applications of Subsampling, Hybrid, and Size-Correction Methods Donald W. K. Andrews Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics Yale University Patrik Guggenberger Department of Economics UCLA November
More informationBootstrapping Long Memory Tests: Some Monte Carlo Results
Bootstrapping Long Memory Tests: Some Monte Carlo Results Anthony Murphy and Marwan Izzeldin University College Dublin and Cass Business School. July 2004 - Preliminary Abstract We investigate the bootstrapped
More informationStochastic integral. Introduction. Ito integral. References. Appendices Stochastic Calculus I. Geneviève Gauthier.
Ito 8-646-8 Calculus I Geneviève Gauthier HEC Montréal Riemann Ito The Ito The theories of stochastic and stochastic di erential equations have initially been developed by Kiyosi Ito around 194 (one of
More informationTesting Weak Convergence Based on HAR Covariance Matrix Estimators
Testing Weak Convergence Based on HAR Covariance atrix Estimators Jianning Kong y, Peter C. B. Phillips z, Donggyu Sul x August 4, 207 Abstract The weak convergence tests based on heteroskedasticity autocorrelation
More informationGMM Estimation of SAR Models with. Endogenous Regressors
GMM Estimation of SAR Models with Endogenous Regressors Xiaodong Liu Department of Economics, University of Colorado Boulder E-mail: xiaodongliucoloradoedu Paulo Saraiva Department of Economics, University
More informationApproximately Most Powerful Tests for Moment Inequalities
Approximately Most Powerful Tests for Moment Inequalities Richard C. Chiburis Department of Economics, Princeton University September 26, 2008 Abstract The existing literature on testing moment inequalities
More informationBootstrapping the Grainger Causality Test With Integrated Data
Bootstrapping the Grainger Causality Test With Integrated Data Richard Ti n University of Reading July 26, 2006 Abstract A Monte-carlo experiment is conducted to investigate the small sample performance
More informationA Bootstrap Test for Conditional Symmetry
ANNALS OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE 6, 51 61 005) A Bootstrap Test for Conditional Symmetry Liangjun Su Guanghua School of Management, Peking University E-mail: lsu@gsm.pku.edu.cn and Sainan Jin Guanghua School
More informationIdenti cation of Positive Treatment E ects in. Randomized Experiments with Non-Compliance
Identi cation of Positive Treatment E ects in Randomized Experiments with Non-Compliance Aleksey Tetenov y February 18, 2012 Abstract I derive sharp nonparametric lower bounds on some parameters of the
More informationA Test of Cointegration Rank Based Title Component Analysis.
A Test of Cointegration Rank Based Title Component Analysis Author(s) Chigira, Hiroaki Citation Issue 2006-01 Date Type Technical Report Text Version publisher URL http://hdl.handle.net/10086/13683 Right
More informationCointegration Tests Using Instrumental Variables Estimation and the Demand for Money in England
Cointegration Tests Using Instrumental Variables Estimation and the Demand for Money in England Kyung So Im Junsoo Lee Walter Enders June 12, 2005 Abstract In this paper, we propose new cointegration tests
More informationChapter 6. Maximum Likelihood Analysis of Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) Models
Chapter 6. Maximum Likelihood Analysis of Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) Models Fall 22 Contents Introduction 2. An illustrative example........................... 2.2 Discussion...................................
More informationOn GMM Estimation and Inference with Bootstrap Bias-Correction in Linear Panel Data Models
On GMM Estimation and Inference with Bootstrap Bias-Correction in Linear Panel Data Models Takashi Yamagata y Department of Economics and Related Studies, University of York, Heslington, York, UK January
More informationDiscussion Paper Series
INSTITUTO TECNOLÓGICO AUTÓNOMO DE MÉXICO CENTRO DE INVESTIGACIÓN ECONÓMICA Discussion Paper Series Size Corrected Power for Bootstrap Tests Manuel A. Domínguez and Ignacio N. Lobato Instituto Tecnológico
More informationComparing Nested Predictive Regression Models with Persistent Predictors
Comparing Nested Predictive Regression Models with Persistent Predictors Yan Ge y and ae-hwy Lee z November 29, 24 Abstract his paper is an extension of Clark and McCracken (CM 2, 25, 29) and Clark and
More informationPanel Data. March 2, () Applied Economoetrics: Topic 6 March 2, / 43
Panel Data March 2, 212 () Applied Economoetrics: Topic March 2, 212 1 / 43 Overview Many economic applications involve panel data. Panel data has both cross-sectional and time series aspects. Regression
More informationMultiple Local Whittle Estimation in Stationary Systems
Multiple Local Whittle Estimation in Stationary Systems P. M. Robinson London School of Economics The Suntory Centre Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines London
More informationOn the optimal weighting matrix for the GMM system estimator in dynamic panel data models
Discussion Paper: 007/08 On the optimal weighting matrix for the GMM system estimator in dynamic panel data models Jan F Kiviet wwwfeeuvanl/ke/uva-econometrics Amsterdam School of Economics Department
More informationTime is discrete and indexed by t =0; 1;:::;T,whereT<1. An individual is interested in maximizing an objective function given by. tu(x t ;a t ); (0.
Chapter 0 Discrete Time Dynamic Programming 0.1 The Finite Horizon Case Time is discrete and indexed by t =0; 1;:::;T,whereT
More informationEconomics 241B Estimation with Instruments
Economics 241B Estimation with Instruments Measurement Error Measurement error is de ned as the error resulting from the measurement of a variable. At some level, every variable is measured with error.
More informationSupplemental Material 1 for On Optimal Inference in the Linear IV Model
Supplemental Material 1 for On Optimal Inference in the Linear IV Model Donald W. K. Andrews Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics Yale University Vadim Marmer Vancouver School of Economics University
More informationComparing the asymptotic and empirical (un)conditional distributions of OLS and IV in a linear static simultaneous equation
Comparing the asymptotic and empirical (un)conditional distributions of OLS and IV in a linear static simultaneous equation Jan F. Kiviet and Jerzy Niemczyk y January JEL-classi cation: C3, C, C3 Keywords:
More informationAveraging Estimators for Regressions with a Possible Structural Break
Averaging Estimators for Regressions with a Possible Structural Break Bruce E. Hansen University of Wisconsin y www.ssc.wisc.edu/~bhansen September 2007 Preliminary Abstract This paper investigates selection
More informationCAE Working Paper # Fixed-b Asymptotic Approximation of the Sampling Behavior of Nonparametric Spectral Density Estimators
CAE Working Paper #06-04 Fixed-b Asymptotic Approximation of the Sampling Behavior of Nonparametric Spectral Density Estimators by Nigar Hashimzade and Timothy Vogelsang January 2006. Fixed-b Asymptotic
More informationComparing Forecast Accuracy of Different Models for Prices of Metal Commodities
Comparing Forecast Accuracy of Different Models for Prices of Metal Commodities João Victor Issler (FGV) and Claudia F. Rodrigues (VALE) August, 2012 J.V. Issler and C.F. Rodrigues () Forecast Models for
More informationQuantiles, Expectiles and Splines
Quantiles, Expectiles and Splines Giuliano De Rossi and Andrew Harvey* Faculty of Economics, Cambridge University February 9, 2007 Abstract A time-varying quantile can be tted to a sequence of observations
More informationE cient Regressions via Optimally Combining Quantile Information
E cient Regressions via Optimally Combining Quantile Information Zhibiao Zhao Penn State University Zhijie Xiao Boston College Abstract We develop a generally applicable framework for constructing e cient
More informationWhen is a copula constant? A test for changing relationships
When is a copula constant? A test for changing relationships Fabio Busetti and Andrew Harvey Bank of Italy and University of Cambridge November 2007 usetti and Harvey (Bank of Italy and University of Cambridge)
More informationNonparametric Estimation of Wages and Labor Force Participation
Nonparametric Estimation of Wages Labor Force Participation John Pepper University of Virginia Steven Stern University of Virginia May 5, 000 Preliminary Draft - Comments Welcome Abstract. Model Let y
More informationMeasuring robustness
Measuring robustness 1 Introduction While in the classical approach to statistics one aims at estimates which have desirable properties at an exactly speci ed model, the aim of robust methods is loosely
More informationAPPENDIX A. Background Mathematics. A.1 Linear Algebra. Vector algebra. Let x denote the n-dimensional column vector with components x 1 x 2.
APPENDIX A Background Mathematics A. Linear Algebra A.. Vector algebra Let x denote the n-dimensional column vector with components 0 x x 2 B C @. A x n Definition 6 (scalar product). The scalar product
More informationBootstrapping Long Memory Tests: Some Monte Carlo Results
Bootstrapping Long Memory Tests: Some Monte Carlo Results Anthony Murphy and Marwan Izzeldin Nu eld College, Oxford and Lancaster University. December 2005 - Preliminary Abstract We investigate the bootstrapped
More informationLECTURE 13: TIME SERIES I
1 LECTURE 13: TIME SERIES I AUTOCORRELATION: Consider y = X + u where y is T 1, X is T K, is K 1 and u is T 1. We are using T and not N for sample size to emphasize that this is a time series. The natural
More informationPanel VAR Models with Spatial Dependence
Panel VAR Models with Spatial Dependence Jan Mutl Institute of Advanced Studies Stumpergasse 56 A-6 Vienna Austria mutl@ihs.ac.at January 3, 29 Abstract I consider a panel vector autoregressive (panel
More informationLeast Squares Estimation of a Panel Data Model with Multifactor Error Structure and Endogenous Covariates
Least Squares Estimation of a Panel Data Model with Multifactor Error Structure and Endogenous Covariates Matthew Harding and Carlos Lamarche January 12, 2011 Abstract We propose a method for estimating
More informationNotes on Asymptotic Theory: Convergence in Probability and Distribution Introduction to Econometric Theory Econ. 770
Notes on Asymptotic Theory: Convergence in Probability and Distribution Introduction to Econometric Theory Econ. 770 Jonathan B. Hill Dept. of Economics University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill November
More information1 Continuation of solutions
Math 175 Honors ODE I Spring 13 Notes 4 1 Continuation of solutions Theorem 1 in the previous notes states that a solution to y = f (t; y) (1) y () = () exists on a closed interval [ h; h] ; under certain
More informationOn Econometric Analysis of Structural Systems with Permanent and Transitory Shocks and Exogenous Variables
On Econometric Analysis of Structural Systems with Permanent and Transitory Shocks and Exogenous Variables Adrian Pagan School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology M. Hashem Pesaran
More informationDefect Detection using Nonparametric Regression
Defect Detection using Nonparametric Regression Siana Halim Industrial Engineering Department-Petra Christian University Siwalankerto 121-131 Surabaya- Indonesia halim@petra.ac.id Abstract: To compare
More informationProblem set 1 - Solutions
EMPIRICAL FINANCE AND FINANCIAL ECONOMETRICS - MODULE (8448) Problem set 1 - Solutions Exercise 1 -Solutions 1. The correct answer is (a). In fact, the process generating daily prices is usually assumed
More informationPanel VAR Models with Spatial Dependence
Panel VAR Models with Spatial Dependence Jan Mutl y Institute of Advanced Studies February 2, 29 Abstract I consider a panel vector-autoregressive model with cross-sectional dependence of the disturbances
More informationEstimation and Inference of Linear Trend Slope Ratios
Estimation and Inference of Linear rend Slope Ratios imothy J. Vogelsang and Nasreen Nawaz Department of Economics, Michigan State University October 4 Abstract We focus on the estimation of the ratio
More informationRobust Con dence Intervals in Nonlinear Regression under Weak Identi cation
Robust Con dence Intervals in Nonlinear Regression under Weak Identi cation Xu Cheng y Department of Economics Yale University First Draft: August, 27 This Version: December 28 Abstract In this paper,
More informationGranger Causality and Dynamic Structural Systems
Granger Causality and Dynamic Structural Systems Halbert White and Xun Lu Department of Economics University of California, San Diego June 26, 2008 Abstract We analyze the relations between Granger (G)
More information11. Bootstrap Methods
11. Bootstrap Methods c A. Colin Cameron & Pravin K. Trivedi 2006 These transparencies were prepared in 20043. They can be used as an adjunct to Chapter 11 of our subsequent book Microeconometrics: Methods
More informationTESTING SERIAL CORRELATION IN SEMIPARAMETRIC VARYING COEFFICIENT PARTIALLY LINEAR ERRORS-IN-VARIABLES MODEL
Jrl Syst Sci & Complexity (2009) 22: 483 494 TESTIG SERIAL CORRELATIO I SEMIPARAMETRIC VARYIG COEFFICIET PARTIALLY LIEAR ERRORS-I-VARIABLES MODEL Xuemei HU Feng LIU Zhizhong WAG Received: 19 September
More informationWeak - Convergence: Theory and Applications
Weak - Convergence: Theory and Applications Jianning Kong y, Peter C. B. Phillips z, Donggyu Sul x October 26, 2018 Abstract The concept of relative convergence, which requires the ratio of two time series
More informationEconomics 620, Lecture 19: Introduction to Nonparametric and Semiparametric Estimation
Economics 620, Lecture 19: Introduction to Nonparametric and Semiparametric Estimation Nicholas M. Kiefer Cornell University Professor N. M. Kiefer (Cornell University) Lecture 19: Nonparametric Analysis
More informationR = µ + Bf Arbitrage Pricing Model, APM
4.2 Arbitrage Pricing Model, APM Empirical evidence indicates that the CAPM beta does not completely explain the cross section of expected asset returns. This suggests that additional factors may be required.
More informationPANEL DATA RANDOM AND FIXED EFFECTS MODEL. Professor Menelaos Karanasos. December Panel Data (Institute) PANEL DATA December / 1
PANEL DATA RANDOM AND FIXED EFFECTS MODEL Professor Menelaos Karanasos December 2011 PANEL DATA Notation y it is the value of the dependent variable for cross-section unit i at time t where i = 1,...,
More informationOn the Power of Tests for Regime Switching
On the Power of Tests for Regime Switching joint work with Drew Carter and Ben Hansen Douglas G. Steigerwald UC Santa Barbara May 2015 D. Steigerwald (UCSB) Regime Switching May 2015 1 / 42 Motivating
More informationUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
2-7 UNIVERSITY OF LIFORNI, SN DIEGO DEPRTMENT OF EONOMIS THE JOHNSEN-GRNGER REPRESENTTION THEOREM: N EXPLIIT EXPRESSION FOR I() PROESSES Y PETER REINHRD HNSEN DISUSSION PPER 2-7 JULY 2 The Johansen-Granger
More informationLarge Panel Data Models with Cross-Sectional Dependence: A Surevey
Large Panel Data Models with Cross-Sectional Dependence: A Surevey Hashem Pesaran University of Southern California, CAFE, USA, and Trinity College, Cambridge, UK A Course on Panel Data Models, University
More informationOn Parameter-Mixing of Dependence Parameters
On Parameter-Mixing of Dependence Parameters by Murray D Smith and Xiangyuan Tommy Chen 2 Econometrics and Business Statistics The University of Sydney Incomplete Preliminary Draft May 9, 2006 (NOT FOR
More information