Joint confidence sets for structural impulse responses

被引:26
|
作者
Inoue, Atsushi [1 ]
Kilian, Lutz [2 ]
机构
[1] Vanderbilt Univ, Dept Econ, 2301 Vanderbilt Pl, Nashville, TN 37235 USA
[2] Univ Michigan, Dept Econ, 611 Tappan St, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
关键词
Joint inference; Shotgun plots; Confidence bands; Impulse response shapes; Bootstrap; Degenerate limiting distribution; SUPPLY SHOCKS; ERROR; INTERVALS; OIL; ESTIMATORS; BANDS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jeconom.2016.02.008
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Many questions of economic interest in structural VAR analysis involve estimates of multiple impulse response functions. Other questions relate to the shape of a given impulse response function. Answering these questions requires joint inference about sets of structural impulse responses, allowing for dependencies across time as well as across response functions. Such joint inference is complicated by the fact that the joint distribution of the structural impulse response estimators becomes degenerate when the number of structural impulse responses of interest exceeds the number of model parameters, as is often the case in applied work. This degeneracy may be overcome by transforming the estimator appropriately. We show that the joint Wald test is invariant to this transformation and converges to a nonstandard distribution, which can be approximated by the bootstrap, allowing the construction of asymptotically valid joint confidence sets for any subset of structural impulse responses, regardless of whether the joint distribution of the structural impulse responses is degenerate or not. We propose to represent the joint confidence sets in the form of "shotgun plots" rather than joint confidence bands for impulse response functions. Several empirical examples demonstrate that this approach not only conveys the same information as confidence bands about the statistical significance of response functions, but may be used to provide economically relevant additional information about the shape of and comovement across response functions that is lost when reducing the joint confidence set to two-dimensional bands. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:421 / 432
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Bootstrapping impulse responses of structural vector autoregressive models identified through GARCH
    Luekepohl, Helmut
    Schlaak, Thore
    JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC DYNAMICS & CONTROL, 2019, 101 : 41 - 61
  • [22] Adaptive confidence sets for kink estimation
    Bengs, Viktor
    Holzmann, Hajo
    ELECTRONIC JOURNAL OF STATISTICS, 2019, 13 (01): : 1523 - 1579
  • [23] BOOTSTRAP CONFIDENCE SETS WITH WEAK INSTRUMENTS
    Davidson, Russell
    MacKinnon, James G.
    ECONOMETRIC REVIEWS, 2014, 33 (5-6) : 651 - 675
  • [24] On adaptive confidence sets for the Wasserstein distances
    Deo, Neil
    Randrianarisoa, Thibault
    BERNOULLI, 2023, 29 (03) : 2119 - 2141
  • [25] Skewness-adjusted bootstrap confidence intervals and confidence bands for impulse response functions
    Grabowski, Daniel
    Staszewska-Bystrova, Anna
    Winker, Peter
    ASTA-ADVANCES IN STATISTICAL ANALYSIS, 2020, 104 (01) : 5 - 32
  • [26] Skewness-adjusted bootstrap confidence intervals and confidence bands for impulse response functions
    Daniel Grabowski
    Anna Staszewska-Bystrova
    Peter Winker
    AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, 2020, 104 : 5 - 32
  • [27] Honest Confidence Sets for High-Dimensional Regression by Projection and Shrinkage
    Zhou, Kun
    Li, Ker-Chau
    Zhou, Qing
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 2023, 118 (541) : 469 - 488
  • [28] Sparse confidence sets for normal mean models
    Ning, Yang
    Cheng, Guang
    INFORMATION AND INFERENCE-A JOURNAL OF THE IMA, 2023, 12 (03)
  • [29] Credibility of Confidence Sets in Nonstandard Econometric Problems
    Muller, Ulrich K.
    Norets, Andriy
    ECONOMETRICA, 2016, 84 (06) : 2183 - 2213
  • [30] Confidence sets and confidence bands for a beta distribution with applications to credit risk management
    Kiatsupaibul, Seksan
    Hayter, Anthony J.
    Somsong, Sarunya
    INSURANCE MATHEMATICS & ECONOMICS, 2017, 75 : 98 - 104