Re: [Gretl-devel] Presentation of model results

Am 23.11.2008 17:15, Allin Cottrell schrieb: Why actually have both the rho and the DW stat? (Assuming rho is the first-order autocorrelation coeff, right?) I mean the DW stat only provides additional information if the p-value is also given. And of course there are no exact p-values for DW usually, and I would argue the whole DW test is now obsolete and has been for some time, since we also know that in many real-world circumstances like lagged endogenous variables it isn't ok anyway. And a point-estimate-type information about first-order autocorrelation is already contained in rho. I know there are historical reasons for DW, but hey: change yes we can ... ;-) Sometimes it seems ridiculous to me that in every econometrics course you have to talk a lot about the historical DW test just because it always appears in the standard estimation output. Next, an unrelated suggestion: What do you think about grouping the adjusted R-squared and the info criteria together, since conceptually they are more or less the same thing. Then of course you don't want to separate the R-squared and the adjusted R-squared, so my suggestion would be (apart from the DW issue before): Mean dependent var 4.538837 S.D. dependent var 0.243346 Sum squared resid 1.617235 S.E. of regression 0.189575 F(2, 45) 17.04203 P-value(F) 3.09e-06 R-squared 0.430985 Log-likelihood 13.26255 Adjusted R-squared 0.405696 Akaike criterion -20.52509 Schwarz criterion -14.91149 Hannan-Quinn -18.40371 rho 0.018627 Durbin-Watson 1.960299 And a minor thing that can also be changed later: I think all information criteria should have the criterion suffix and therefore it should be "Hannan-Quinn crit.". thanks, sven