The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparing Density Forecasts via Weighted Likelihood Ratio Tests
Abstract
We propose a test for comparing the out-of-sample accuracy of competing density forecasts of a variable. The test is valid under general conditions: The data can be heterogeneous and the forecasts can be based on (nested or nonnested) parametric models or produced by semiparametric, nonparametric, or Bayesian estimation techniques. The evaluation is based on scoring rules, which are loss functions defined over the density forecast and the realizations of the variable. We restrict attention to the logarithmic scoring rule and propose an out-of-sample “weighted likelihood ratio” test that compares weighted averages of the scores for the competing forecasts. The user-defined weights are a way to focus attention on different regions of the distribution of the variable. For a uniform weight function, the test can be interpreted as an extension of Vuong's likelihood ratio test to time series data and to an out-of-sample testing framework. We apply the tests to evaluate density forecasts of U.S. inflation produced by linear and Markov-switching Phillips curve models estimated by either maximum likelihood or Bayesian methods. We conclude that a Markov-switching Phillips curve estimated by maximum likelihood produces the best density forecasts of inflation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Politis, D. N., & Romano, J. P. (1994) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1994.10476870 · Cited by 2,649
Cited by
Prior Selection for Vector Autoregressions
Giannone, D., Lenza, M., & Primiceri, G. E. (2015) · Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.1162/rest_a_00483 · Cited by 710
Comparing Density Forecasts Using Threshold- and Quantile-Weighted Scoring Rules
Gneiting, T., & Ranjan, R. (2011) · Journal of Business & Economic Statistics · doi:10.1198/jbes.2010.08110 · Cited by 507
Dynamic Conditional Correlation: On Properties and Estimation
Aielli, G. P. (2013) · Journal of Business & Economic Statistics · doi:10.1080/07350015.2013.771027 · Cited by 422
Copula Methods for Forecasting Multivariate Time Series
Patton, A. (2013) · Handbook of Economic Forecasting · doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-62731-5.00016-6 · Cited by 320
Clark, T. E., & Ravazzolo, F. (2015) · Journal of Applied Econometrics · doi:10.1002/jae.2379 · Cited by 317
Metadata
- Authors
- Amisano, G., & Giacomini, R.
- Venue
- Journal of Business & Economic Statistics
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2007-04
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 177-190
- ISSN
- 0735-0015 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-2707
- OpenAlex
- W2041492724
- Cited by
- 518
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 30.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparing Density Forecasts via Weighted Likelihood Ratio Tests. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1198/073500106000000332
- The paper
- Amisano, G., & Giacomini, R. (2007). Comparing Density Forecasts via Weighted Likelihood Ratio Tests. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1198/073500106000000332
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.