2012
DOI: 10.1140/epjb/e2012-30221-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimation of the Hurst exponent from noisy data: a Bayesian approach

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The first phase is designed to check for possible multifractality in the process under examination. Whereas several Bayesian procedures have been proposed to characterize stochastic processes (Krog et al, 2018; Makarava et al, 2011; Makarava & Holschneider, 2012; Moscoso del Prado Martín, 2013; Sørbye & Rue, 2018; Thornton & Gilden, 2005), none of them tackles the issue of multifractality. Our test for multifractality focuses on the distribution of the increments of the series.…”
Section: Frequency-domain Analyses: Power Spectral Density Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first phase is designed to check for possible multifractality in the process under examination. Whereas several Bayesian procedures have been proposed to characterize stochastic processes (Krog et al, 2018; Makarava et al, 2011; Makarava & Holschneider, 2012; Moscoso del Prado Martín, 2013; Sørbye & Rue, 2018; Thornton & Gilden, 2005), none of them tackles the issue of multifractality. Our test for multifractality focuses on the distribution of the increments of the series.…”
Section: Frequency-domain Analyses: Power Spectral Density Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A computationally simple choice is to adopt flat, noninformative priors. In the case of fGn, the Hurst parameter H has typically been assigned a uniform prior, argued for in terms of having no knowledge about the parameter (Benhmehdi et al, ; Makarava et al, ; Makarava & Holschneider, ). Also, it is suggested to use the Jeffreys prior for the marginal standard deviation of the model, that is, π ( τ −1/2 )∼ τ 1/2 .…”
Section: Pc Priors For the Parameters Of Fgnmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Alternative approaches include the use of wavelets (Abry & Veitch, 1998;McCoy & Walden, 1996) and maximum likelihood and Whittle estimation; see Beran et al (2013) for a comprehensive overview. Using a Bayesian framework, H has typically been assigned a uniform prior (Benhmehdi, Makarava, Menhamidouche, & Holschneider, 2011;Makarava, Benmehdi, & Holschneider, 2011;Makarava, & Holschneider, 2012). This is computationally simple, and due to lack of prior knowledge, a noninformative prior might seem like a good choice.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…See [28] for general background on mixed effects models and [29,30] for details on the Bayesian estimation of H from the observation of Y. As in this reference, for the analysis of the experimental Dictyostelium discoideum cell track data, we took a scaling invariant Jeffreys-like prior for λ [31] with density π (λ) ∼ λ −1 , a flat, (or diffuse) prior for β with density π (β) 1, as well as a flat prior for H with density π (H ) = χ [0,1] [32].…”
Section: B Fractional Brownian Motionmentioning
confidence: 99%