Table 2: Sizes and local powers of tests of the cointegration rank
(a) Empirical sizes | ||||
Я = |
10 |
Я = |
20 | |
T |
REG |
LLL |
REG |
LLL |
20 |
0.012 |
0.000 |
0.010 |
0.000 |
30 |
0.033 |
0.000 |
0.033 |
0.000 |
50 |
0.053 |
0.004 |
0.050 |
0.002 |
100 |
0.056 |
0.030 |
0.068 |
0.033 |
(b) Local powers (size adjusted) | ||||
Я = |
10 |
Я = |
20 | |
T |
REG |
LLL |
REG |
LLL |
20 |
0.242 |
0.150 |
0.240 |
0.143 |
30 |
0.221 |
0.150 |
0.227 |
0.148 |
50 |
0.186 |
0.141 |
0.206 |
0.153 |
100 |
0.164 |
0.146 |
0.169 |
0.166 |
Note: Rejection frequency for tests of the null hypothesis r = 1. “REG” indi-
cates the regression based test suggested in Theorem 2 and “LLL” denotes the
LR-bar statistic suggested by Lyhagen et al. (2001). The local power is com-
puted by simulating the data under the local alternative VNT = —10/ (T∖N).
The critical values are used that yield tests with an exact size of 0.05 under the
null hypothesis (size adjusted power). 5000 replications are used to compute
the rejection frequencies.
23
More intriguing information
1. The changing face of Chicago: demographic trends in the 1990s2. Opciones de política económica en el Perú 2011-2015
3. The name is absent
4. Prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding and its determinants in first 6 months of life: A prospective study
5. The Role of Trait Emotional Intelligence (El) in the Workplace.
6. Heavy Hero or Digital Dummy: multimodal player-avatar relations in FINAL FANTASY 7
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. The name is absent
10. ISSUES IN NONMARKET VALUATION AND POLICY APPLICATION: A RETROSPECTIVE GLANCE