Méthode de simulation avec les variables antithétiques

Les fichiers qui accompagnent mon document ont été réalisés avec le logiciel Latex et les simulations ont été réalisés par Splus(R).

Simulation-Based Finite and Large Sample Tests in Multivariate Regressions.

In the context of multivariate linear regression (MLR) models, it is well known that commonly employed asymptotic test criteria are seriously biased towards overrejection. In this paper, we propose a general method for constructing exact tests of possibly nonlinear hypotheses on the coefficients of MLR systems. For the case of uniform linear hypotheses, we present exact distributional invariance results concerning several standard test criteria. These include Wilks' likelihood ratio (LR) criterion as well as trace and maximum root criteria. The normality assumption is not necessary for most of the results to hold. Implications for inference are two-fold. First, invariance to nuisance parameters entails that the technique of Monte Carlo tests can be applied on all these statistics to obtain exact tests of uniform linear hypotheses. Second, the invariance property of the latter statistic is exploited to derive general nuisance-parameter-free bounds on the distribution of the LR statistic for arbitrary hypotheses. Even though it may be difficult to compute these bounds analytically, they can easily be simulated, hence yielding exact bounds Monte Carlo tests. Illustrative simulation experiments show that the bounds are sufficiently tight to provide conclusive results with a high probability. Our findings illustrate the value of the bounds as a tool to be used in conjunction with more traditional simulation-based test methods (e.g., the parametric bootstrap) which may be applied when the bounds are not conclusive.

Simulation-Based Finite-Sample Tests for Heteroskedasticity and ARCH Effects.

A wide range of tests for heteroskedasticity have been proposed in the econometric and statistics literature. Although a few exact homoskedasticity tests are available, the commonly employed procedures are quite generally based on asymptotic approximations which may not provide good size control in finite samples. There has been a number of recent studies that seek to improve the reliability of common heteroskedasticity tests using Edgeworth, Bartlett, jackknife and bootstrap methods. Yet the latter remain approximate. In this paper, we describe a solution to the problem of controlling the size of homoskedasticity tests in linear regression contexts. We study procedures based on the standard test statistics [e.g., the Goldfeld-Quandt, Glejser, Bartlett, Cochran, Hartley, Breusch-Pagan-Godfrey, White and Szroeter criteria] as well as tests for autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARCH-type models). We also suggest several extensions of the existing procedures (sup-type of combined test statistics) to allow for unknown breakpoints in the error variance. We exploit the technique of Monte Carlo tests to obtain provably exact p-values, for both the standard and the new tests suggested. We show that the MC test procedure conveniently solves the intractable null distribution problem, in particular those raised by the sup-type and combined test statistics as well as (when relevant) unidentified nuisance parameter problems under the null hypothesis. The method proposed works in exactly the same way with both Gaussian and non-Gaussian disturbance distributions [such as heavy-tailed or stable distributions]. The performance of the procedures is examined by simulation. The Monte Carlo experiments conducted focus on : (1) ARCH, GARCH, and ARCH-in-mean alternatives; (2) the case where the variance increases monotonically with : (i) one exogenous variable, and (ii) the mean of the dependent variable; (3) grouped heteroskedasticity; (4) breaks in variance at unknown points. We find that the proposed tests achieve perfect size control and have good power.

Simulation-Based Finite-Sample Normality Tests in Linear Regressions

In the literature on tests of normality, much concern has been expressed over the problems associated with residual-based procedures. Indeed, the specialized tables of critical points which are needed to perform the tests have been derived for the location-scale model; hence reliance on available significance points in the context of regression models may cause size distortions. We propose a general solution to the problem of controlling the size normality tests for the disturbances of standard linear regression, which is based on using the technique of Monte Carlo tests.

Simulation-Based Finite-and Large-sample Inference Methods in Multivariate Regressions and Seemingly Unrelated Regressions

In the context of multivariate regression (MLR) and seemingly unrelated regressions (SURE) models, it is well known that commonly employed asymptotic test criteria are seriously biased towards overrejection. in this paper, we propose finite-and large-sample likelihood-based test procedures for possibly non-linear hypotheses on the coefficients of MLR and SURE systems.

Sampling Interval and estimated Betas : Implications for the Presence of Transitory Components in Stock Prices

We provide a theoretical framework to explain the empirical finding that the estimated betas are sensitive to the sampling interval even when using continuously compounded returns. We suppose that stock prices have both permanent and transitory components. The permanent component is a standard geometric Brownian motion while the transitory component is a stationary Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process. The discrete time representation of the beta depends on the sampling interval and two components labelled \"permanent and transitory betas\". We show that if no transitory component is present in stock prices, then no sampling interval effect occurs. However, the presence of a transitory component implies that the beta is an increasing (decreasing) function of the sampling interval for more (less) risky assets. In our framework, assets are labelled risky if their \"permanent beta\" is greater than their \"transitory beta\" and vice versa for less risky assets. Simulations show that our theoretical results provide good approximations for the means and standard deviations of estimated betas in small samples. Our results can be perceived as indirect evidence for the presence of a transitory component in stock prices, as proposed by Fama and French (1988) and Poterba and Summers (1988).

Testing Mean-Variance Efficiency in CAPM with Possibly Non-Gaussian Errors : An Exact Simulation-Based Approach

In this paper we propose exact likelihood-based mean-variance efficiency tests of the market portfolio in the context of Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM), allowing for a wide class of error distributions which include normality as a special case. These tests are developed in the frame-work of multivariate linear regressions (MLR). It is well known however that despite their simple statistical structure, standard asymptotically justified MLR-based tests are unreliable. In financial econometrics, exact tests have been proposed for a few specific hypotheses [Jobson and Korkie (Journal of Financial Economics, 1982), MacKinlay (Journal of Financial Economics, 1987), Gib-bons, Ross and Shanken (Econometrica, 1989), Zhou (Journal of Finance 1993)], most of which depend on normality. For the gaussian model, our tests correspond to Gibbons, Ross and Shanken’s mean-variance efficiency tests. In non-gaussian contexts, we reconsider mean-variance efficiency tests allowing for multivariate Student-t and gaussian mixture errors. Our framework allows to cast more evidence on whether the normality assumption is too restrictive when testing the CAPM. We also propose exact multivariate diagnostic checks (including tests for multivariate GARCH and mul-tivariate generalization of the well known variance ratio tests) and goodness of fit tests as well as a set estimate for the intervening nuisance parameters. Our results [over five-year subperiods] show the following: (i) multivariate normality is rejected in most subperiods, (ii) residual checks reveal no significant departures from the multivariate i.i.d. assumption, and (iii) mean-variance efficiency tests of the market portfolio is not rejected as frequently once it is allowed for the possibility of non-normal errors.

Projection-Based Statistical Inference in Linear Structural Models with Possibly Weak Instruments

It is well known that standard asymptotic theory is not valid or is extremely unreliable in models with identification problems or weak instruments [Dufour (1997, Econometrica), Staiger and Stock (1997, Econometrica), Wang and Zivot (1998, Econometrica), Stock and Wright (2000, Econometrica), Dufour and Jasiak (2001, International Economic Review)]. One possible way out consists here in using a variant of the Anderson-Rubin (1949, Ann. Math. Stat.) procedure. The latter, however, allows one to build exact tests and confidence sets only for the full vector of the coefficients of the endogenous explanatory variables in a structural equation, which in general does not allow for individual coefficients. This problem may in principle be overcome by using projection techniques [Dufour (1997, Econometrica), Dufour and Jasiak (2001, International Economic Review)]. AR-types are emphasized because they are robust to both weak instruments and instrument exclusion. However, these techniques can be implemented only by using costly numerical techniques. In this paper, we provide a complete analytic solution to the problem of building projection-based confidence sets from Anderson-Rubin-type confidence sets. The latter involves the geometric properties of “quadrics” and can be viewed as an extension of usual confidence intervals and ellipsoids. Only least squares techniques are required for building the confidence intervals. We also study by simulation how “conservative” projection-based confidence sets are. Finally, we illustrate the methods proposed by applying them to three different examples: the relationship between trade and growth in a cross-section of countries, returns to education, and a study of production functions in the U.S. economy.

Identification, Weak Instruments and Statistical Inference in Econometrics

We discuss statistical inference problems associated with identification and testability in econometrics, and we emphasize the common nature of the two issues. After reviewing the relevant statistical notions, we consider in turn inference in nonparametric models and recent developments on weakly identified models (or weak instruments). We point out that many hypotheses, for which test procedures are commonly proposed, are not testable at all, while some frequently used econometric methods are fundamentally inappropriate for the models considered. Such situations lead to ill-defined statistical problems and are often associated with a misguided use of asymptotic distributional results. Concerning nonparametric hypotheses, we discuss three basic problems for which such difficulties occur: (1) testing a mean (or a moment) under (too) weak distributional assumptions; (2) inference under heteroskedasticity of unknown form; (3) inference in dynamic models with an unlimited number of parameters. Concerning weakly identified models, we stress that valid inference should be based on proper pivotal functions —a condition not satisfied by standard Wald-type methods based on standard errors — and we discuss recent developments in this field, mainly from the viewpoint of building valid tests and confidence sets. The techniques discussed include alternative proposed statistics, bounds, projection, split-sampling, conditioning, Monte Carlo tests. The possibility of deriving a finite-sample distributional theory, robustness to the presence of weak instruments, and robustness to the specification of a model for endogenous explanatory variables are stressed as important criteria assessing alternative procedures.

Finite-Sample Simulation-Based Inference in VAR Models with Applications to Order Selection and Causality Testing

Statistical tests in vector autoregressive (VAR) models are typically based on large-sample approximations, involving the use of asymptotic distributions or bootstrap techniques. After documenting that such methods can be very misleading even with fairly large samples, especially when the number of lags or the number of equations is not small, we propose a general simulation-based technique that allows one to control completely the level of tests in parametric VAR models. In particular, we show that maximized Monte Carlo tests [Dufour (2002)] can provide provably exact tests for such models, whether they are stationary or integrated. Applications to order selection and causality testing are considered as special cases. The technique developed is applied to quarterly and monthly VAR models of the U.S. economy, comprising income, money, interest rates and prices, over the period 1965-1996.

Éffectivité des subventions à la recherche et au développement, évaluation circonstancielle à l'aide d'une micro-simulation.

Rapport de recherche