2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecosta.2020.04.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Note on Adaptive Group Lasso for Structural Break Time Series

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, we show that group lasso is a consistent estimator for non-zero parameter changes giving us appropriate weights for a second step adaptive group lasso estimation. This approach is similar to the ideas put forth in Wei and Huang (2010), Horowitz and Huang (2013), Schmidt and Schweikert (2021) and Behrendt and Schweikert (2021).…”
Section: Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 82%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, we show that group lasso is a consistent estimator for non-zero parameter changes giving us appropriate weights for a second step adaptive group lasso estimation. This approach is similar to the ideas put forth in Wei and Huang (2010), Horowitz and Huang (2013), Schmidt and Schweikert (2021) and Behrendt and Schweikert (2021).…”
Section: Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…Addressing this issue, Bai and Perron (1998,2003) use dynamic programming techniques (henceforth Bai–Perron algorithm), requiring at most least‐squares operations of order O ( T 2 ) for any number of breaks, to add breaks sequentially to the model. Recently, several approaches have been proposed that reframe the task of detecting and estimating structural breaks as a model selection problem employing penalized regressions and related model selection techniques (Davis et al 2006; Harchaoui and Lévy‐Leduc, 2010; Jin et al 2013; Chan et al 2014; Ciuperca, 2014; Jin et al 2016; Qian and Jia, 2016; Qian and Su, 2016; Behrendt and Schweikert, 2021). Instead of grid search procedures which augment linear regression models with parameter changes, model selection procedures take a top‐down approach and try to shrink the set of all possible breakpoint candidates to contain only the true breakpoints.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To obtain a consistent estimator for the number of breaks, their timing and coefficient changes, we need to design a second step refinement reducing the number of superfluous breaks. Immediate candidates are using a backward elimination algorithm (BEA) optimizing some information criterion (Chan et al, 2014;Gao et al, 2019;Safikhani and Shojaie, 2020) or applying the adaptive group LASSO estimator as a second step using the group LASSO estimates as weights (Behrendt and Schweikert, 2021;Schweikert, 2021). In the following, we outline the former approach and discuss the latter approach in the Supplementary Material because the BEA produces more accurate results in this setting.…”
Section: Second Step Estimatormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ciuperca (2014), Jin et al (2016) and Qian and Su (2016b) consider LASSO-type estimators for the detection of multiple structural breaks in linear regressions. Behrendt and Schweikert (2021) propose an alternative strategy to eliminate superfluous breakpoints identified by the group LASSO estimator. They suggest a second step adaptive group LASSO which performs comparably to the backward elimination algorithm suggested in Chan et al (2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several methods are used to model structural breaks, each offering unique advantages. These include Markov Switching, the threshold model, adaptive group lasso, time-varying parameters, and a combination of Realised Volatility and Heterogeneous Autoregressive methods, as implemented by [13][14][15][16][17][18][19].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%