首页> 外文OA文献 >Approaches for the joint evaluation of hypothesis tests: Classical testing, Bayes testing, and joint confirmation
【2h】

Approaches for the joint evaluation of hypothesis tests: Classical testing, Bayes testing, and joint confirmation

机译:联合评估假设检验的方法:经典检验,贝叶斯检验和联合确认

摘要

The occurrence of decision problems with changing roles of null and alternative hypotheses has increased interest in extending the classical hypothesis testing setup. Particularly, confirmation analysis has been in the focus of some recent contributions in econometrics. We emphasize that confirmation analysis is grounded in classical testing and should be contrasted with the Bayesian approach. Differences across the three approaches - traditional classical testing, Bayes testing, joint confirmation - are highlighted for a popular testing problem. A decision is searched for the existence of a unit root in a time-series process on the basis of two tests. One of them has the existence of a unit root as its null hypothesis and its non-existence as its alternative, while the roles of null and alternative are reversed for the other hypothesis test.
机译:随着无效假设和替代假设角色的变化而发生决策问题,对扩展经典假设检验设置的兴趣日益浓厚。特别是,确认分析一直是计量经济学中一些最新贡献的焦点。我们强调确认分析是建立在经典测试基础上的,应与贝叶斯方法进行对比。三种方法之间的差异-传统的经典测试,贝叶斯测试,联合确认-突出显示了一个流行的测试问题。在两次测试的基础上,搜索在时序过程中是否存在单位根的决策。其中之一将单位根的存在作为其无效假设,将不存在作为其替代,而对于另一项假设检验,无效和替代的作用相反。

著录项

  • 作者

    Kunst Robert M.;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2005
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号