Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userSmall-sample one-sided testing in extreme value regression models
184
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Eliane Pinheiro
Publication date
2014
fields
Mathematical Statistics
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We derive adjusted signed likelihood ratio statistics for a general class of extreme value regression models. The adjustments reduce the error in the standard normal approximation to the distribution of the signed likelihood ratio statistic. We use Monte Carlo simulations to compare the finite-sample performance of the different tests. Our simulations suggest that the signed likelihood ratio test tends to be liberal when the sample size is not large, and that the adjustments are effective in shrinking the size distortion. Two real data applications are presented and discussed.
rate research
Read More
We deal with a general class of extreme-value regression models introduced by Barreto- Souza and Vasconcellos (2011). Our goal is to derive an adjusted likelihood ratio statistic that is approximately distributed as c{hi}2 with a high degree of accuracy. Although the adjusted statistic requires more computational effort than its unadjusted counterpart, it is shown that the adjustment term has a simple compact form that can be easily implemented in standard statistical software. Further, we compare the finite sample performance of the three classical tests (likelihood ratio, Wald, and score), the gradient test that has been recently proposed by Terrell (2002), and the adjusted likelihood ratio test obtained in this paper. Our simulations favor the latter. Applications of our results are presented. Key words: Extreme-value regression; Gradient test; Gumbel distribution; Likelihood ratio test; Nonlinear models; Score test; Small-sample adjustments; Wald test.
Monotonicity is a key qualitative prediction of a wide array of economic models derived via robust comparative statics. It is therefore important to design effective and practical econometric methods for testing this prediction in empirical analysis. This paper develops a general nonparametric framework for testing monotonicity of a regression function. Using this framework, a broad class of new tests is introduced, which gives an empirical researcher a lot of flexibility to incorporate ex ante information she might have. The paper also develops new methods for simulating critical values, which are based on the combination of a bootstrap procedure and new selection algorithms. These methods yield tests that have correct asymptotic size and are asymptotically nonconservative. It is also shown how to obtain an adaptive rate optimal test that has the best attainable rate of uniform consistency against models whose regression function has Lipschitz-continuous first-order derivatives and that automatically adapts to the unknown smoothness of the regression function. Simulations show that the power of the new tests in many cases significantly exceeds that of some prior tests, e.g. that of Ghosal, Sen, and Van der Vaart (2000). An application of the developed procedures to the dataset of Ellison and Ellison (2011) shows that there is some evidence of strategic entry deterrence in pharmaceutical industry where incumbents may use strategic investment to prevent generic entries when their patents expire.
The test of homogeneity for normal mixtures has been conducted in diverse research areas, but constructing a theory of the test of homogeneity is challenging because the parameter set for the null hypothesis corresponds to singular points in the parameter space. In this paper, we examine this problem from a new perspective and offer a theory of hypothesis testing for homogeneity based on a variational Bayes framework. In the conventional theory, the constant order term of the free energy has remained unknown, however, we clarify its asymptotic behavior because it is necessary for constructing a hypothesis test. Numerical experiments shows the validity of our theoretical results.
We provide some asymptotic theory for the largest eigenvalues of a sample covariance matrix of a p-dimensional time series where the dimension p = p_n converges to infinity when the sample size n increases. We give a short overview of the literature on the topic both in the light- and heavy-tailed cases when the data have finite (infinite) fourth moment, respectively. Our main focus is on the heavytailed case. In this case, one has a theory for the point process of the normalized eigenvalues of the sample covariance matrix in the iid case but also when rows and columns of the data are linearly dependent. We provide limit results for the weak convergence of these point processes to Poisson or cluster Poisson processes. Based on this convergence we can also derive the limit laws of various function als of the ordered eigenvalues such as the joint convergence of a finite number of the largest order statistics, the joint limit law of the largest eigenvalue and the trace, limit laws for successive ratios of ordered eigenvalues, etc. We also develop some limit theory for the singular values of the sample autocovariance matrices and their sums of squares. The theory is illustrated for simulated data and for the components of the S&P 500 stock index.
Randomization is a basis for the statistical inference of treatment effects without strong assumptions on the outcome-generating process. Appropriately using covariates further yields more precise estimators in randomized experiments. R. A. Fisher suggested blocking on discrete covariates in the design stage or conducting analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) in the analysis stage. We can embed blocking into a wider class of experimental design called rerandomization, and extend the classical ANCOVA to more general regression adjustment. Rerandomization trumps complete randomization in the design stage, and regression adjustment trumps the simple difference-in-means estimator in the analysis stage. It is then intuitive to use both rerandomization and regression adjustment. Under the randomization-inference framework, we establish a unified theory allowing the designer and analyzer to have access to different sets of covariates. We find that asymptotically (a) for any given estimator with or without regression adjustment, rerandomization never hurts either the sampling precision or the estimated precision, and (b) for any given design with or without rerandomization, our regression-adjusted estimator never hurts the estimated precision. Therefore, combining rerandomization and regression adjustment yields better coverage properties and thus improves statistical inference. To theoretically quantify these statements, we discuss optimal regression-adjusted estimators in terms of the sampling precision and the estimated precision, and then measure the additional gains of the designer and the analyzer. We finally suggest using rerandomization in the design and regression adjustment in the analysis followed by the Huber--White robust standard error.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
