2015
DOI: 10.1080/00207179.2015.1052017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Durbin–Watson serial correlation test for ARX processes via excited adaptive tracking

Abstract: Abstract. We propose a new statistical test for the residual autocorrelation in ARX adaptive tracking. The introduction of a persistent excitation in the adaptive tracking control allows us to build a bilateral statistical test based on the well-known Durbin-Watson statistic. We establish the almost sure convergence and the asymptotic normality for the Durbin-Watson statistic leading to a powerful serial correlation test. Numerical experiments illustrate the good performances of our statistical test procedure.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Third, the Breusch-Godfrey LM test detected serial correlation problems. Fourth, the Durbin-Watson test was applied for autocorrelation regression measurement in residuals (Bercu et al 2015). Finally, we used the cumulative sum on the recursive residuals (CUSUM) to explain shifts in mean or variance, and CUSUM of square (CUSUMSQ) tests detected rapid changes from a constant regression coefficient (Riaz et al 2011).…”
Section: Stability Checkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Third, the Breusch-Godfrey LM test detected serial correlation problems. Fourth, the Durbin-Watson test was applied for autocorrelation regression measurement in residuals (Bercu et al 2015). Finally, we used the cumulative sum on the recursive residuals (CUSUM) to explain shifts in mean or variance, and CUSUM of square (CUSUMSQ) tests detected rapid changes from a constant regression coefficient (Riaz et al 2011).…”
Section: Stability Checkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…• the probability associated with each of the first 3 variables is less than 0.05, which highlights the fact that all variables are statistically significant; • the probability associated with the variable Regional_disparities_in_unemployment_rates ate_risk_of_poverty is 0.6484 and is therefore higher than the critical value 0.05, which shows us that it is not statistically significant; • the probability associated with the constant C is 0.0001 < 0.05, so this is also statistically significant; • the R-squared is 0.810229, and the Adjusted R-squared is 0.734320; Thus, based on the analysis of the 3 studied regression models, it is considered that the best model is Model 1 because it is the only one that has statistically significant regression equation coefficients. Moreover, Model 1 also has the Durbin-Watson [55] state value closest to 2, which shows the stability of the model. According to the AIC, SBIC and HQIC criteria, Model 1 would have been in second place at a short distance from Model 2, which, however, cannot be considered because it is not statistically significant.…”
mentioning
confidence: 74%
“…In Table 12, the Durbin Watson (DW) test is used to check possible autocorrelation in carbon price prediction residuals [32]. Carbon price forecast residuals of single BP, SVM, and ELM models have a positive correlation, which indicates that the single model has poor stability again.…”
Section: Residual Testmentioning
confidence: 99%