IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/uaajxx/v14y2010i2p217-234.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Asymptotic Analysis of the Bootstrap Bias Correction for the Empirical CTE

Author

Listed:
  • Jae Ahn
  • Nariankadu Shyamalkumar

Abstract

The a-level Conditional Tail Expectation (CTE) of a continuous random variable X is defined as its conditional expectation given the event {X > qα} where qα represents its α-level quantile. It is well known that the empirical CTE (the average of the n(1 – a) largest order statistics in a sample of size n) is a negatively biased estimator of the CTE. This bias vanishes as the sample size increases but in small samples can be significant. Hence the need for bias correction. Although the bootstrap method has been suggested for correcting the bias of the empirical CTE, recent research shows that alternate kernel-based methods of bias correction perform better in some practical examples. To further understand this phenomenon, we conduct an asymptotic analysis of the exact bootstrap bias correction for the empirical CTE, focusing on its performance as a point estimator of the bias of the empirical CTE.We provide heuristics suggesting that the exact bootstrap bias correction is approximately a kernel-based estimator, albeit using a bandwidth that converges to zero faster than mean square optimal bandwidths. This approximation provides some insight into why the bootstrap method has markedly less residual bias, but at the cost of having higher variance. We prove a central limit theorem (CLT) for the exact bootstrap bias correction using an alternate representation as an /1 distance of the sample observations from the α-level empirical quantile. The CLT, in particular, shows that the bootstrap bias correction has a relative error of n-¼. In contrast, for any given ε > 0, and under the assumption that the sampling density is sufficiently smooth, relative error of order O(n-½+ε) is attainable using kernel-based estimators. Thus, in an asymptotic sense, the bootstrap bias correction as a point estimator of the bias is not optimal in the case of smooth sampling densities. Bootstrapped risk measures have recently found interest as estimators in their own right; as an application we derive the CLT for the bootstrap expectation of the empirical CTE. We also report on a simulation study of the effect of small sample sizes on the quality of the approximation provided by the CLT.In support of the bootstrap method we show that the bootstrap bias correction is optimal if the sampling density is constrained only to be Lipschitz of order 1/2 (or, loosely speaking, to have only half a derivative). Because in practice densities are at least twice differentiable, this optimality result largely fails to make the bootstrap method attractive to practitioners.

Suggested Citation

  • Jae Ahn & Nariankadu Shyamalkumar, 2010. "An Asymptotic Analysis of the Bootstrap Bias Correction for the Empirical CTE," North American Actuarial Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 217-234.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:uaajxx:v:14:y:2010:i:2:p:217-234
    DOI: 10.1080/10920277.2010.10597586
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10920277.2010.10597586
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10920277.2010.10597586?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Lauer, Alexandra & Zähle, Henryk, 2017. "Bootstrap consistency and bias correction in the nonparametric estimation of risk measures of collective risks," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 99-108.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:uaajxx:v:14:y:2010:i:2:p:217-234. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/uaaj .

    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.