2012
DOI: 10.1080/07350015.2012.663258
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Time Varying Dimension Models

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
24
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 74 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
1
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, adding stochastic volatility to the VARMAs substantially improves their forecast performance. This is in line with the large literature on inflation forecasting, which shows the considerable benefits of allowing for stochastic volatility for both point and density forecasts (see, e.g., Chan et al, 2012;Clark & Doh, 2014;Stock & Watson, 2007). It is also interesting to note that VARMA(p,1)-SV1 and the more general VARMA(p,1)-SV2 perform very similarly, indicating that allowing for time variation in Ω t is mostly sufficient.…”
Section: Forecasting Resultssupporting
confidence: 83%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In addition, adding stochastic volatility to the VARMAs substantially improves their forecast performance. This is in line with the large literature on inflation forecasting, which shows the considerable benefits of allowing for stochastic volatility for both point and density forecasts (see, e.g., Chan et al, 2012;Clark & Doh, 2014;Stock & Watson, 2007). It is also interesting to note that VARMA(p,1)-SV1 and the more general VARMA(p,1)-SV2 perform very similarly, indicating that allowing for time variation in Ω t is mostly sufficient.…”
Section: Forecasting Resultssupporting
confidence: 83%
“…Intuitively, if the actual outcome y o t+k is unlikely under the density forecast, the value of the predictive likelihood will be small, and vice versa. We then evaluate the joint density forecasts using the sum of log predictive likelihoods, which is a standard metric in the literature (see, e.g., Belmonte, Koop, & Korobilis, 2014;Chan, Koop, Leon-Gonzalez, & Strachan, 2012;Clark, 2011):…”
Section: Forecasting Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Discrete mixture and spike-and-slab models offer an alternative approach but suffer from inherent computational challenges. One option is to restrict the space of models under consideration: Chan et al (2012) included or excluded a variable for all times, whereas Frühwirth-Schnatter and Wagner (2010) also considered whether each variable is globally static or dynamic. The extensions in Huber et al (2019) and Uribe and Lopes (2017) allowed for locally static or dynamic variables, whereas Nakajima and West (2013) provided a procedure for local thresholding of dynamic coefficients.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…He lists some studies which find that models with stochastic volatility provide substantially better forecasts than those obtained from constant error variance models (e.g. Clark and Doh, 2011;Chan et al, 2012). Then he introduces a new class of models that has both stochastic volatility and moving average errors and illustrates an empirical application of forecasting US quarterly CPI inflation, in which his approach provides better in-sample fit and out-of-sample forecast performance than the standard variants with only stochastic volatility.…”
Section: Risk Premium Forecastingmentioning
confidence: 99%