IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intfor/v25y2009i4p833-839.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Diagnostics cannot have much power against general alternatives

Author

Listed:
  • Freedman, David A.

Abstract

Model diagnostics are shown to have little power unless alternative hypotheses can be narrowly defined. For example, the independence of observations cannot be tested against general forms of dependence. Thus, the basic assumptions in regression models cannot be inferred from the data. Equally, the proportionality assumption in proportional-hazards models is not testable. Specification error is a primary source of uncertainty in forecasting, and this uncertainty will be difficult to resolve without external calibration. Model-based causal inference is even more problematic.

Suggested Citation

  • Freedman, David A., 2009. "Diagnostics cannot have much power against general alternatives," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 833-839, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:intfor:v:25:y:2009:i:4:p:833-839
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169-2070(09)00075-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wojciech Olszewski & Alvaro Sandroni, 2008. "Manipulability of Future-Independent Tests," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(6), pages 1437-1466, November.
    2. Freedman, David A., 2008. "Survival Analysis: A Primer," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 62, pages 110-119, May.
    3. Lehrer, Ehud, 2001. "Any Inspection Is Manipulable," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(5), pages 1333-1347, September.
    4. Peter Kennedy, 2003. "A Guide to Econometrics, 5th Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 5, volume 1, number 026261183x, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhang, Shulin & Okhrin, Ostap & Zhou, Qian M. & Song, Peter X.-K., 2016. "Goodness-of-fit test for specification of semiparametric copula dependence models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 193(1), pages 215-233.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Colin, Stewart, 2011. "Nonmanipulable Bayesian testing," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(5), pages 2029-2041, September.
    2. Al-Najjar, Nabil I. & Sandroni, Alvaro & Smorodinsky, Rann & Weinstein, Jonathan, 2010. "Testing theories with learnable and predictive representations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(6), pages 2203-2217, November.
    3. Kavaler, Itay & Smorodinsky, Rann, 2019. "On comparison of experts," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 94-109.
    4. David Lagziel & Ehud Lehrer, 2021. "Transferable deposits as a screening mechanism," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(2), pages 483-504, March.
    5. Itay Kavaler & Rann Smorodinsky, 2019. "A Cardinal Comparison of Experts," Papers 1908.10649, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2020.
    6. Alvaro Sandroni & Wojciech Olszewski, 2008. "Falsifiability," PIER Working Paper Archive 08-016, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    7. Wojciech Olszewski & Alvaro Sandroni, 2009. "Strategic Manipulation of Empirical Tests," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 57-70, February.
    8. Yossi Feinberg & Nicolas Lambert, 2015. "Mostly calibrated," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(1), pages 153-163, February.
    9. Olszewski, Wojciech, 2015. "Calibration and Expert Testing," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    10. Wojciech Olszewski & Alvaro Sandroni, 2006. "Strategic Manipulation of Empirical Tests," Discussion Papers 1425, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    11. Foster, Dean P. & Young, H. Peyton, 2011. "A Strategy-Proof Test of Portfolio Returns," Working Papers 11-50, University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School, Weiss Center.
    12. Mark Whitmeyer & Kun Zhang, 2023. "Redeeming Falsifiability?," Papers 2303.15723, arXiv.org.
    13. Jinsuk Yang & Qing Hao & Mahmut Yaşar, 2023. "Institutional investors and cross‐border mergers and acquisitions: The 2000–2018 period," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 553-583, September.
    14. Styan, Jacob & Boerngen, Maria A. & Barrowclough, Michael J., 2021. "Factors Influencing Increased Usage of Cash Rent Leases in Illinois," Journal of the ASFMRA, American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, vol. 2021.
    15. Jason Barabas, 1998. "Wage Erosion, Economic Assessments, and Social Welfare Opinions," JCPR Working Papers 56, Northwestern University/University of Chicago Joint Center for Poverty Research.
    16. Berna Karali & Scott H. Irwin & Olga Isengildina‐Massa, 2020. "Supply Fundamentals and Grain Futures Price Movements," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(2), pages 548-568, March.
    17. Carlberg, Jared G., 2002. "Effects Of Ownership Restrictions On Farmland Values In Saskatchewan," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(2), pages 1-10, August.
    18. Liuan Wang & Lu (Lucy) Yan & Tongxin Zhou & Xitong Guo & Gregory R. Heim, 2020. "Understanding Physicians’ Online-Offline Behavior Dynamics: An Empirical Study," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 537-555, June.
    19. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    20. Liv Osland & Inge Thorsen, 2013. "Spatial Impacts, Local Labour Market Characteristics and Housing Prices," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(10), pages 2063-2083, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intfor:v:25:y:2009:i:4:p:833-839. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijforecast .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.