Dear Allin,
Thanks for quickly acting on this, but when I installed the current
snapshot, I noticed that the coint Steps 1,2, and 4 completely disappeared.
Here's what my output looks like when I run coint with --verbose:
Step 1: testing for a unit root in X1
Step 2: testing for a unit root in X2
Step 3: cointegrating regression
Cointegrating regression -
OLS, using observations 2012-12-14:2013-12-13 (T = 250)
Dependent variable: X1
coefficient std. error t-ratio p-value
---------------------------------------------------------
const 0.331381 0.119003 2.785 0.0058 ***
X2 0.932445 0.0138352 67.40 1.83e-161 ***
Mean dependent var 8.297023 S.D. dependent var 0.962697
Sum squared resid 11.94726 S.E. of regression 0.219487
R-squared 0.948229 Adjusted R-squared 0.948020
Log-likelihood 25.38522 Akaike criterion −46.77044
Schwarz criterion −39.72752 Hannan-Quinn −43.93587
rho 0.912250 Durbin-Watson 0.174442
Step 4: testing for a unit root in uhat
There is evidence for a cointegrating relationship if:
(a) The unit-root hypothesis is not rejected for the individual variables,
and
(b) the unit-root hypothesis is rejected for the residuals (uhat) from the
cointegrating regression.
I hate to say this, but my comment might have led to the introduction of a
bug.
Can I also have a feature request while this is being fixed? Using
--verbose produces the AIC and BIC values for all lags if selected as
test-down criteria, but when tstat is selected for test-down, nothing is
produced. I know tstat test-down stops when >1.645 is observed so that
t-stats for lower lags are not available, but it could be nice to see other
t-stats above that lag again for the sake of consistency in the --verbose
option.
Best,
Koray
On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Allin Cottrell <cottrell(a)wfu.edu> wrote:
On Sat, 6 Jun 2015, Sven Schreiber wrote:
Am 06.06.2015 um 18:34 schrieb Allin Cottrell:
>
>> On Thu, 4 Jun 2015, Koray Simsek wrote:
>>
>> Dear Allin,
>>>
>>> I am sorry that the two lines I sent in my original post do not
>>> replicate
>>> the issue in the current snapshot as they were run in an older gretl
>>> where
>>> MAIC was used as the test-down criteria and selected a smaller lag value
>>> for test-down in LRM.
>>>
>>> Sven explained my point perfectly. If you run ADF for LRY (not LRM) as
>>> follows, you'll notice that AIC below the regression output is different
>>> from the AIC for k=0 in the test-down procedure. This is because the
>>> regression is run on the full-sample whereas the test-down is done for
>>> the
>>> lag 5 compatible sample.
>>>
>>
>> OK, thanks, now I see. This should be fixed in current CVS and snapshots.
>>
>
> And which of the two samples is used now, starting at t0 + maxlag or at
> t0 + bestlag?
>
The same as the stand-alone ADF test: t0 + bestlag.
Allin
_______________________________________________
Gretl-users mailing list
Gretl-users(a)lists.wfu.edu
http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-users