2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2008.12.020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exact and asymptotic tests for possibly non-regular hypotheses on stochastic volatility models

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The issue with this approach is that the derivatives needed in the delta method are not straightforward to calculate. An alternative approach consists in computing joint confidence sets for the model parameters as done for instance in [21] for stochastic volatility models and in [22] for GARCH models with heavytailed innovations. This method constructs simultaneous confidence sets for the parameters of the model by numerically "inverting" some test statistic such as the likelihood ratio test.…”
Section: The Time-varying Gerber Correlationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The issue with this approach is that the derivatives needed in the delta method are not straightforward to calculate. An alternative approach consists in computing joint confidence sets for the model parameters as done for instance in [21] for stochastic volatility models and in [22] for GARCH models with heavytailed innovations. This method constructs simultaneous confidence sets for the parameters of the model by numerically "inverting" some test statistic such as the likelihood ratio test.…”
Section: The Time-varying Gerber Correlationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We test the presence of a drift on the Standard and Poor's composite price index (SP), 1928-87. That process is known to involve a large amount of heteroscedasticity and have been used by Gallant et al (1997) and Dufour and Valéry (2008) to fit a stochastic volatility model. Here, we are interested in robust testing without modelling the volatility in the disturbance process.…”
Section: Illustrative Application: Standard and Poor's Driftmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5 Thus, compared to the MMC approach, the AMMC approach will be less time-consuming (Phipps and Byron, 2007). Although the MMC approach is gaining popularity (Beaulieu, Dufour and Khalaf, in press;Dufour and Tarek, 2006;Dufour and Valéry, 2009;Frederic and Olivier, 2006;Thomas et al, 2007), it is criticized for the following reasons: (1) it can be computationally demanding, (2) MMC-based actual rejection frequency may be very much less than the level of the test and may in consequence be severely lacking power and (3) there is a possibility of getting a much larger p value for nuisance parameter values far away from the ones that actually generated the data (MacKinnon, 2009). This paper adopts the classical approach.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%