IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/istatr/v66y1998i3p323-336.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bayesian Comparison of ARIMA and Stationary ARMA Models

Author

Listed:
  • John Marriott
  • Paul Newbold

Abstract

Time series analysts have long been concerned with distinguishing stationary “generating processes” from processes for which differencing is required to induce stationarity. In practical applications, this issue is addressed almost invariably through formal hypothesis testing. In this paper, we explore some aspects of the Bayesian approach to the problem, leading to the calculation of posterior odds ratios. Interesting features arise in the simplest possible variant of the problem, where a choice has to be made between a random walk and a stationary first order autoregressive model. We discuss in detail the analysis of this case, and also indicate how our approach extends to the more general comparison of an ARIMA model with a stationary competitor. Les chercheurs intéresseés par l'analyse des données chronologiques sont préoccupés de discemer les procesus générant des séies stationnaries des processus générant des séries stationnaies dans la différence. Typiquement, cette question est adressée au moyen d'un test d'hypothése. Les auteurs appliquent ici la méthode bayesienne pour faire un choix. Meme dans le cas simple où le choix est entre un modèle de chocs aleatoires et un modèle stationnaire autoregreif de premier ordre, l'approche présente des propriétés notables. l'application de la méthode proposée pour comparer un modèle ARIMA à un modéle stationnaire alternatif.

Suggested Citation

  • John Marriott & Paul Newbold, 1998. "Bayesian Comparison of ARIMA and Stationary ARMA Models," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 66(3), pages 323-336, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:istatr:v:66:y:1998:i:3:p:323-336
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-5823.1998.tb00376.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-5823.1998.tb00376.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1751-5823.1998.tb00376.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yamin Ahmad & Adam Check & Ming Chien Lo, 2024. "Unit Roots in Macroeconomic Time Series: A Comparison of Classical, Bayesian and Machine Learning Approaches," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 63(6), pages 2139-2173, June.
    2. Marriott, John & Newbold, Paul, 2000. "The strength of evidence for unit autoregressive roots and structural breaks: A Bayesian perspective," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 1-25, September.
    3. Lima, L.M. Marangon & Popova, E. & Damien, P., 2014. "Modeling and forecasting of Brazilian reservoir inflows via dynamic linear models," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 464-476.
    4. Brian Hanlon & Catherine Forbes, 2002. "Model Selection Criteria for Segmented Time Series from a Bayesian Approach to Information Compression," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 8/02, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
    5. Robert M. Kunst & Michael Reutter, 2000. "Decisions on Seasonal Unit Roots," CESifo Working Paper Series 286, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:istatr:v:66:y:1998:i:3:p:323-336. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isiiinl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.