IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

The Block Bootstrap for Parameter Estimation Error In Recursive Estimation Schemes, With Applications to Predictive Evaluation

  • Valentina Corradi

    ()

    (Queen Mary, University of London)

  • Norman Swanson

    ()

    (Rutgers University)

This paper introduces a new block bootstrap which is valid for recursive m-estimators, in the sense that its use suFFIces to mimic the limiting distribution of (1/P^.5)(SUM(t=R to T-1)(THETA-t-hat - THETA-plus)); where R denotes the length of the estimation period, P the number of recursively estimated parameters, bµt is a recursive m¡estimator constructed using the first t observations, and THETA-t-plus is its probability limit. In the recursive case, earlier observations are used more frequently than temporally subsequent observations. This introduces a bias to the usual block bootstrap. We circumvent this problem by first resampling R observations from the initial R sample observations, and then concatenating onto this vector an additional P resampled observations from the remaining sample. Thereafter, THETA-hat-t-star is constructed using the resampled series, and an adjustment term is added to 1/P^.5)(SUM(t=R to T-1)(THETA-hat-t-star - THETA-t-hat)); in order to ensure that the distribution of this sum is the same as the distribution of (1/P^.5)(SUM(t=R to T-1)(THETA-t-hat - THETA-plus)). This parameter estimation error bootstrap for recursive estimation schemes can be used to provide valid critical values in a variety of interesting testing contexts, and three such leading applications are developed. The first is a generalization of the reality check test of White (2000) that allows for non vanishing parameter estimation error. The second is an out-of-sample version of the integrated conditional moment (ICM) test of Bierens (1982,1990) and Bierens and Ploberger (1997) which provides out of sample tests consistent against generic (nonlinear) alternatives. Finally, the third is a procedure assessing the relative out-of-sample predictive accuracy of multiple conditional distribution models. This procedure is based on an extension of the Andrews (1997) conditional Kolmogorov test. The main findings from a small Monte Carlo experiment indicate that: (i) the adjustment term used in the suggested bootstrap substantially improve coverage rates relative to a bootstrap without adjustment, and (ii) the suggested bootstrap is as reliable as the standard block bootstrap within the context of full sample estimation.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.sas.rutgers.edu/virtual/snde/wp/2003-13.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Rutgers University, Department of Economics in its series Departmental Working Papers with number 200313.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 21 Oct 2003
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:rut:rutres:200313
Contact details of provider: Postal:
New Jersey Hall - 75 Hamilton Street, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1248

Phone: (732) 932-7363
Fax: (732) 932-7416
Web page: http://economics.rutgers.edu/

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Christoffersen, Peter F, 1998. "Evaluating Interval Forecasts," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(4), pages 841-62, November.
  2. Hansen, Lars Peter & Jagannathan, Ravi, 1997. " Assessing Specification Errors in Stochastic Discount Factor Models," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(2), pages 557-90, June.
  3. West, K.D., 1994. "Asymptotic Inference About Predictive Ability," Working papers 9417, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
  4. Donald W.K. Andrews, 1999. "Higher-Order Improvements of a Computationally Attractive-Step Bootstrap for Extremum Estimators," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1230R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Jan 2001.
  5. Donald W.K. Andrews, 2002. "The Block-block Bootstrap: Improved Asymptotic Refinements," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1370, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  6. Peter F. Christoffersen & Francis X. Diebold, 1994. "Optimal Prediction Under Asymmetric Loss," NBER Technical Working Papers 0167, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. Francis X. Diebold & Robert S. Mariano, 1994. "Comparing Predictive Accuracy," NBER Technical Working Papers 0169, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  8. Francis X. Diebold & Todd A. Gunther & Anthony S. Tay, 1997. "Evaluating Density Forecasts," Center for Financial Institutions Working Papers 97-37, Wharton School Center for Financial Institutions, University of Pennsylvania.
  9. Hall, Peter & Horowitz, Joel L, 1996. "Bootstrap Critical Values for Tests Based on Generalized-Method-of-Moments Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(4), pages 891-916, July.
  10. Goncalves, Silvia & White, Halbert, 2000. "Maximum Likelihood and the Bootstrap for Nonlinear Dynamic Models," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt1bj657ff, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
  11. Corradi, Valentina & Swanson, Norman R., 2006. "Bootstrap conditional distribution tests in the presence of dynamic misspecification," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 779-806, August.
  12. Peter Reinhard Hansen, 2001. "An Unbiased and Powerful Test for Superior Predictive Ability," Working Papers 2001-06, Brown University, Department of Economics.
  13. Donald W. K. Andrews, 1997. "A Conditional Kolmogorov Test," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(5), pages 1097-1128, September.
  14. repec:cup:etheor:v:13:y:1997:i:6:p:808-17 is not listed on IDEAS
  15. Newey, Whitney K & West, Kenneth D, 1987. "A Simple, Positive Semi-definite, Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(3), pages 703-08, May.
  16. Todd E. Clark & Michael W. McCracken, 2000. "Tests of Equal Forecast Accuracy and Encompassing for Nested Models," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0319, Econometric Society.
  17. Andrews, Donald W K, 1991. "Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 817-58, May.
  18. Gon alves, S lvia & White, Halbert, 2002. "The Bootstrap Of The Mean For Dependent Heterogeneous Arrays," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(06), pages 1367-1384, December.
  19. Lars Peter Hansen & John Heaton & Erzo Luttmer, 1993. "Econometric Evaluation of Asset Pricing Models," NBER Technical Working Papers 0145, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  20. Corradi, Valentina & Swanson, Norman R. & Olivetti, Claudia, 2001. "Predictive ability with cointegrated variables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 315-358, September.
  21. Corradi, Valentina & Swanson, Norman R., 2002. "A consistent test for nonlinear out of sample predictive accuracy," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 353-381, October.
  22. Oliver Linton & Esfandiar Maasoumi & Yoon-Jae Whang, 2003. "Consistent testing for stochastic dominance under general sampling schemes," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 2208, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  23. Clive W.J. Granger, 1999. "Outline of forecast theory using generalized cost functions," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 161-173.
  24. Francis X. Diebold & Jinyong Hahn & Anthony S. Tay, 1999. "Multivariate Density Forecast Evaluation And Calibration In Financial Risk Management: High-Frequency Returns On Foreign Exchange," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(4), pages 661-673, November.
  25. Peter F. Christoffersen & Francis X. Diebold, 1997. "How Relevant is Volatility Forecasting for Financial Risk Management?," Center for Financial Institutions Working Papers 97-45, Wharton School Center for Financial Institutions, University of Pennsylvania.
  26. Corradi, Valentina, 1999. "Deciding Between I(0) And I(1) Via Flil-Based Bounds," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(05), pages 643-663, October.
  27. Giacomini, Raffaella, 2002. "Comparing Density Forecasts via Weighted Likelihood Ratio Tests: Asymptotic and Bootstrap Methods," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt59s2g5j5, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
  28. Christoffersen & Diebold, . "Further Results on Forecasting and Model Selection Under Asymmetric Loss," Home Pages _059, University of Pennsylvania.
  29. Norman R. Swanson & Halbert White, 1995. "A Model Selection Approach to Real-Time Macroeconomic Forecasting Using Linear Models and Artificial Neural Networks," Macroeconomics 9503004, EconWPA.
  30. Clements, Michael P. & Smith, Jeremy, 2002. "Evaluating multivariate forecast densities: a comparison of two approaches," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 397-407.
  31. Stinchcombe, Maxwell B. & White, Halbert, 1998. "Consistent Specification Testing With Nuisance Parameters Present Only Under The Alternative," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(03), pages 295-325, June.
  32. Weiss, Andrew A, 1996. "Estimating Time Series Models Using the Relevant Cost Function," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(5), pages 539-60, Sept.-Oct.
  33. Hansen, Bruce E, 1996. "Inference When a Nuisance Parameter Is Not Identified under the Null Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(2), pages 413-30, March.
  34. Diebold, Francis X. & Chen, Celia, 1996. "Testing structural stability with endogenous breakpoint A size comparison of analytic and bootstrap procedures," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 221-241, January.
  35. McCracken, Michael W., 2007. "Asymptotics for out of sample tests of Granger causality," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 719-752, October.
  36. Valentina Corradi & Norman R. Swanson, 2003. "A Test for Comparing Multiple Misspecified Conditional Distributions," Departmental Working Papers 200314, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
  37. Bierens, Herman J., 1982. "Consistent model specification tests," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 105-134, October.
  38. Chatfield, Chris, 1993. "Calculating Interval Forecasts," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 11(2), pages 121-35, April.
  39. Christoffersen, Peter & Hahn, Jinyong & Inoue, Atsushi, 2001. "Testing and comparing Value-at-Risk measures," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 325-342, July.
  40. Granger, C. W. J. & White, Halbert & Kamstra, Mark, 1989. "Interval forecasting : An analysis based upon ARCH-quantile estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 87-96, January.
  41. Wooldridge, Jeffrey M. & White, Halbert, 1988. "Some Invariance Principles and Central Limit Theorems for Dependent Heterogeneous Processes," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(02), pages 210-230, August.
  42. Halbert White, 2000. "A Reality Check for Data Snooping," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1097-1126, September.
  43. Clements, M.P. & Smith J., 1998. "Evaluating The Forecast of Densities of Linear and Non-Linear Models: Applications to Output Growth and Unemployment," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 509, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rut:rutres:200313. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.