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.

Testing Normality : A GMM Approach

In this paper, we consider testing marginal normal distributional assumptions. More precisely, we propose tests based on moment conditions implied by normality. These moment conditions are known as the Stein (1972) equations. They coincide with the first class of moment conditions derived by Hansen and Scheinkman (1995) when the random variable of interest is a scalar diffusion. Among other examples, Stein equation implies that the mean of Hermite polynomials is zero. The GMM approach we adopted is well suited for two reasons. It allows us to study in detail the parameter uncertainty problem, i.e., when the tests depend on unknown parameters that have to be estimated. In particular, we characterize the moment conditions that are robust against parameter uncertainty and show that Hermite polynomials are special examples. This is the main contribution of the paper. The second reason for using GMM is that our tests are also valid for time series. In this case, we adopt a Heteroskedastic-Autocorrelation-Consistent approach to estimate the weighting matrix when the dependence of the data is unspecified. We also make a theoretical comparison of our tests with Jarque and Bera (1980) and OPG regression tests of Davidson and MacKinnon (1993). Finite sample properties of our tests are derived through a comprehensive Monte Carlo study. Finally, three applications to GARCH and realized volatility models are presented.

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.

Testing for a Unit Root in Panels with Dynamic Factors

This paper studies testing for a unit root for large n and T panels in which the cross-sectional units are correlated. To model this cross-sectional correlation, we assume that the data is generated by an unknown number of unobservable common factors. We propose unit root tests in this environment and derive their (Gaussian) asymptotic distribution under the null hypothesis of a unit root and local alternatives. We show that these tests have significant asymptotic power when the model has no incidental trends. However, when there are incidental trends in the model and it is necessary to remove heterogeneous deterministic components, we show that these tests have no power against the same local alternatives. Through Monte Carlo simulations, we provide evidence on the finite sample properties of these new tests.

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.

Monte Carlo Tests with Nuisance Parameters: A General Approach to Finite-Sample Inference and Nonstandard Asymptotics

The technique of Monte Carlo (MC) tests [Dwass (1957), Barnard (1963)] provides an attractive method of building exact tests from statistics whose finite sample distribution is intractable but can be simulated (provided it does not involve nuisance parameters). We extend this method in two ways: first, by allowing for MC tests based on exchangeable possibly discrete test statistics; second, by generalizing the method to statistics whose null distributions involve nuisance parameters (maximized MC tests, MMC). Simplified asymptotically justified versions of the MMC method are also proposed and it is shown that they provide a simple way of improving standard asymptotics and dealing with nonstandard asymptotics (e.g., unit root asymptotics). Parametric bootstrap tests may be interpreted as a simplified version of the MMC method (without the general validity properties of the latter).

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.

Whither Pediatric Research and Predisposition Genetic Testing?

Research in which children undergo genetic testing for predisposition to adult-onset diseases or disorders can lead to a better understanding of these conditions. It can possibly also help encourage early detection and the development of clinical and preventive interventions for those found to be at increased hereditary risk. Increasingly, predisposition testing is becoming part of pediatric genetic research. However, the paucity of normative texts about the conduct of pediatric research using predisposition genetic testing generates complex legal and ethical issues. Drawing on the current texts that govern predisposition genetic testing in research and the norms of pediatric research, we outline points of consensus and divergence as well as recommendations regarding predisposition genetic testing in pediatric research.