1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432
|
#!/usr/bin/env python
# coding: utf-8
# DO NOT EDIT
# Autogenerated from the notebook autoregressive_distributed_lag.ipynb.
# Edit the notebook and then sync the output with this file.
#
# flake8: noqa
# DO NOT EDIT
# # Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) models
#
#
# ## ARDL Models
#
# Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) models extend Autoregressive
# models with lags of explanatory variables. While ARDL models are
# technically AR-X models, the key difference is that ARDL models focus on
# the exogenous variables and selecting the correct lag structure from both
# the endogenous variable and the exogenous variables. ARDL models are also
# closely related to Vector Autoregressions, and a single ARDL is
# effectively one row of a VAR. The key distinction is that an ARDL assumes
# that the exogenous variables are exogenous in the sense that it is not
# necessary to include the endogenous variable as a predictor of the
# exogenous variables.
#
# The full specification of ARDL models is
#
# $$
# Y_t = \underset{\text{Constant and Trend}}{\underbrace{\delta_0 +
# \delta_1 t + \ldots + \delta_k t^k}}
# + \underset{\text{Seasonal}}{\underbrace{\sum_{i=0}^{s-1} \gamma_i
# S_i}}
# + \underset{\text{Autoregressive}}{\underbrace{\sum_{p=1}^P \phi_p
# Y_{t-p}}}
# + \underset{\text{Distributed Lag}}{\underbrace{\sum_{k=1}^M
# \sum_{j=0}^{Q_k} \beta_{k,j} X_{k, t-j}}}
# + \underset{\text{Fixed}}{\underbrace{Z_t \Gamma}} + \epsilon_t
# $$
#
# The terms in the model are:
#
# * $\delta_i$: constant and deterministic time regressors. Set using
# `trend`.
# * $S_i$ are seasonal dummies which are included if `seasonal=True`.
# * $X_{k,t-j}$ are the exogenous regressors. There are a number of
# formats that can be used to specify which lags are included. Note that the
# included lag lengths do no need to be the same. If `causal=True`, then the
# lags start with lag 1. Otherwise lags begin with 0 so that the model
# included the contemporaneous relationship between $Y_t$ and $X_t$.
# * $Z_t$ are any other fixed regressors that are not part of the
# distributed lag specification. In practice these regressors may be
# included when they do no contribute to the long run-relationship between
# $Y_t$ and the vector of exogenous variables $X_t$.
# * $\{\epsilon_t\}$ is assumed to be a White Noise process
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
import seaborn as sns
sns.set_style("darkgrid")
sns.mpl.rc("figure", figsize=(16, 6))
sns.mpl.rc("font", size=14)
# ### Data
#
# This notebook makes use of money demand data from Denmark, as first used
# in S. Johansen and K. Juselius (1990). The key variables are:
#
# * `lrm`: Log of real money measured using M2
# * `lry`: Log of real income
# * `ibo`: Interest rate on bonds
# * `ide`: Interest rate of bank deposits
#
# The standard model uses `lrm` as the dependent variable and the other
# three as exogenous drivers.
#
# Johansen, S. and Juselius, K. (1990), Maximum Likelihood Estimation and
# Inference on Cointegration – with Applications to the Demand for Money,
# Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 52, 2, 169–210.
#
# We start by loading the data and examining it.
from statsmodels.datasets.danish_data import load
from statsmodels.tsa.api import ARDL
from statsmodels.tsa.ardl import ardl_select_order
data = load().data
data = data[["lrm", "lry", "ibo", "ide"]]
data.tail()
# We plot the demeaned data so that all series appear on the same scale.
# The `lrm` series appears to be non-stationary, as does `lry`. The
# stationarity of the other two is less obvious.
_ = (data - data.mean()).plot()
# ### Model Selection
#
# `ardl_select_order` can be used to automatically select the order. Here
# we use min the minimum AIC among all modes that consider up to 3 lags of
# the endogenous variable and 3 lags of each exogenous variable. `trend="c"`
# indicates that a constant should be included in the model.
sel_res = ardl_select_order(data.lrm,
3,
data[["lry", "ibo", "ide"]],
3,
ic="aic",
trend="c")
print(f"The optimal order is: {sel_res.model.ardl_order}")
# The optimal order is returned as the number of lags of the endogenous
# variable followed by each of the exogenous regressors. The attribute
# `model` on `sel_res` contains the model `ARDL` specification which can be
# used to call `fit`. Here we look at the summary where the `L#` indicates
# that lag length (e.g., `L0` is no lag, i.e., $X_{k,t}$, `L2` is 2 lags,
# i.e., $X_{k,t-2}$).
res = sel_res.model.fit()
res.summary()
# ### Global searches
#
# The selection criteria can be switched the BIC which chooses a smaller
# model. Here we also use the `glob=True` option to perform a global search
# which considers models with any subset of lags up to the maximum lag
# allowed (3 here). This option lets the model selection choose non-
# contiguous lag specifications.
sel_res = ardl_select_order(data.lrm,
3,
data[["lry", "ibo", "ide"]],
3,
ic="bic",
trend="c",
glob=True)
sel_res.model.ardl_order
# While the `ardl_order` shows the largest included lag of each variable,
# `ar_lags` and `dl_lags` show the specific lags included. The AR component
# is regular in the sense that all 3 lags are included. The DL component is
# not since `ibo` selects only lags 0 and 3 and ide selects only lags 2.
sel_res.model.ar_lags
sel_res.model.dl_lags
# We can take a look at the best performing models according to the BIC
# which are stored in the `bic` property. `ibo` at lags 0 and 3 is
# consistently selected, as is `ide` at either lag 2 or 3, and `lry` at lag
# 0. The selected AR lags vary more, although all of the best specifications
# select some.
for i, val in enumerate(sel_res.bic.head(10)):
print(f"{i+1}: {val}")
# ### Direct Parameterization
#
# ARDL models can be directly specified using the `ARDL` class. The first
# argument is the endogenous variable ($Y_t$). The second is the AR lags. It
# can be a constant, in which case lags 1, 2, ..., $P$ are included, or a
# list of specific lags indices to include (e.g., `[1, 4]`). The third are
# the exogenous variables, and the fourth is the list of lags to include.
# This can be one of
#
# * An `int`: Include lags 0, 1, ..., Q
# * A dict with column names when `exog` is a `DataFrame` or numeric
# column locations when `exog` is a NumPy array (e.g., `{0:1, 1: 2, 2:3}`,
# would match the specification below if a NumPy array was used.
# * A dict with column names (DataFrames) or integers (NumPy arrays) that
# contains a list of specific lags to include (e.g., `{"lry":[0,2],
# "ibo":[1,2]}`).
#
# The specification below matches that model selected by
# `ardl_select_order`.
res = ARDL(data.lrm,
2,
data[["lry", "ibo", "ide"]], {
"lry": 1,
"ibo": 2,
"ide": 3
},
trend="c").fit()
res.summary()
# ### NumPy Data
#
# Below we see how the specification of ARDL models differs when using
# NumPy arrays. The key difference is that the keys in the dictionary are
# now integers which indicate the column of `x` to use. This model is
# identical to the previously fit model and all key value match exactly
# (e.g., Log Likelihood).
y = np.asarray(data.lrm)
x = np.asarray(data[["lry", "ibo", "ide"]])
res = ARDL(y, 2, x, {0: 1, 1: 2, 2: 3}, trend="c").fit()
res.summary()
# ### Causal models
#
# Using the `causal=True` flag eliminates lag 0 from the DL components, so
# that all variables included in the model are known at time $t-1$ when
# modeling $Y_t$.
res = ARDL(
data.lrm,
2,
data[["lry", "ibo", "ide"]],
{
"lry": 1,
"ibo": 2,
"ide": 3
},
trend="c",
causal=True,
).fit()
res.summary()
# ## Unconstrained Error Correction Models (UECM)
#
# Unconstrained Error Correction Models reparameterize ARDL model to focus
# on the long-run component of a time series. The reparameterized model is
#
# $$
# \Delta Y_t = \underset{\text{Constant and Trend}}{\underbrace{\delta_0 +
# \delta_1 t + \ldots + \delta_k t^k}}
# + \underset{\text{Seasonal}}{\underbrace{\sum_{i=0}^{s-1} \gamma_i
# S_i}}
# + \underset{\text{Long-Run}}{\underbrace{\lambda_0 Y_{t-1} +
# \sum_{b=1}^M \lambda_i X_{b,t-1}}}
# + \underset{\text{Autoregressive}}{\underbrace{\sum_{p=1}^P \phi_p
# \Delta Y_{t-p}}}
# + \underset{\text{Distributed Lag}}{\underbrace{\sum_{k=1}^M
# \sum_{j=0}^{Q_k} \beta_{k,j} \Delta X_{k, t-j}}}
# + \underset{\text{Fixed}}{\underbrace{Z_t \Gamma}} + \epsilon_t
# $$
#
#
# Most of the components are the same. The key differences are:
#
# * The levels only enter at lag 1
# * All other lags of $Y_t$ or $X_{k,t}$ are differenced
#
# Due to their structure, UECM models _do not_ support irregular lag
# specifications, and so lags specifications must be integers. The AR lag
# length must be an integer or `None`, while the DL lag specification can be
# an integer or a dictionary of integers. Other options such as `trend`,
# `seasonal`, and `causal` are identical.
#
# Below we select a model and then using the class method `from_ardl` to
# construct the UECM. The parameter estimates prefixed with `D.` are
# differences.
from statsmodels.tsa.api import UECM
sel_res = ardl_select_order(data.lrm,
3,
data[["lry", "ibo", "ide"]],
3,
ic="aic",
trend="c")
ecm = UECM.from_ardl(sel_res.model)
ecm_res = ecm.fit()
ecm_res.summary()
# ### Cointegrating Relationships
#
# Because the focus is on the long-run relationship, the results of UECM
# model fits contains a number of properties that focus on the long-run
# relationship. These are all prefixed `ci_`, for cointegrating.
# `ci_summary` contains the normalized estimates of the cointegrating
# relationship and associated estimated values.
ecm_res.ci_summary()
# `ci_resids` contains the long-run residual, which is the error the
# drives figure changes in $\Delta Y_t$.
_ = ecm_res.ci_resids.plot(title="Cointegrating Error")
# ### Seasonal Dummies
#
# Here we add seasonal terms, which appear to be statistically
# significant.
ecm = UECM(data.lrm, 2, data[["lry", "ibo", "ide"]], 2, seasonal=True)
seasonal_ecm_res = ecm.fit()
seasonal_ecm_res.summary()
# All deterministic terms are included in the `ci_` prefixed terms. Here
# we see the normalized seasonal effects in the summary.
seasonal_ecm_res.ci_summary()
# The residuals are somewhat more random in appearance.
_ = seasonal_ecm_res.ci_resids.plot(
title="Cointegrating Error with Seasonality")
# ## The relationship between Consumption and Growth
#
# Here we look at an example from Greene's _Econometric analysis_ which
# focuses on teh long-run relationship between consumption and growth. We
# start by downloading the raw data.
#
# Greene, W. H. (2000). Econometric analysis 4th edition. International
# edition, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 201-215.
greene = pd.read_fwf(
"http://www.stern.nyu.edu/~wgreene/Text/Edition7/TableF5-2.txt")
greene.head()
# We then transform the index to be a pandas `DatetimeIndex` so that we
# can easily use seasonal terms.
index = pd.to_datetime(
greene.Year.astype("int").astype("str") + "Q" +
greene.qtr.astype("int").astype("str"))
greene.index = index
greene.index.freq = greene.index.inferred_freq
greene.head()
# We defined `g` as the log of real gdp and `c` as the log of real
# consumption.
greene["c"] = np.log(greene.realcons)
greene["g"] = np.log(greene.realgdp)
# ### Lag Length Selection
#
# The selected model contains 5 lags of consumption and 2 of growth (0 and
# 1). Here we include seasonal terms although these are not significant.
sel_res = ardl_select_order(greene.c,
8,
greene[["g"]],
8,
trend="c",
seasonal=True,
ic="aic")
ardl = sel_res.model
ardl.ardl_order
res = ardl.fit(use_t=True)
res.summary()
# `from_ardl` is a simple way to get the equivalent UECM specification.
# Here we rerun the selection without the seasonal terms.
sel_res = ardl_select_order(greene.c, 8, greene[["g"]], 8, trend="c", ic="aic")
uecm = UECM.from_ardl(sel_res.model)
uecm_res = uecm.fit()
uecm_res.summary()
# We see that for every % increase in consumption, we need a 1.05%
# increase in gdp. In other words, the saving rate is estimated to be around
# 5%.
uecm_res.ci_summary()
_ = uecm_res.ci_resids.plot(title="Cointegrating Error")
# ### Direct Specification of `UECM` models
#
# `UECM` can be used to directly specify model lag lengths.
uecm = UECM(greene.c, 2, greene[["g"]], 1, trend="c")
uecm_res = uecm.fit()
uecm_res.summary()
# The changes in the lag structure make little difference in the estimated
# long-run relationship.
uecm_res.ci_summary()
# ## Bounds Testing
#
# `UECMResults` expose the bounds test of Pesaran, Shin, and Smith (2001).
# This test facilitates testing whether there is a level relationship
# between a set of variables without identifying which variables are I(1).
# This test provides two sets of critical and p-values. If the test
# statistic is below the critical value for the lower bound, then there
# appears to be no levels relationship irrespective of the order or
# integration in the $X$ variables. If it is above the upper bound, then
# there appears to be a levels relationship again, irrespective of the order
# of integration of the $X$ variables. There are 5 cases covered in the
# paper that include different combinations of deterministic regressors in
# the model or the test.
#
#
# $$\Delta Y_{t}=\delta_{0} + \delta_{1}t + Z_{t-1}\beta +
# \sum_{j=0}^{P}\Delta X_{t-j}\Gamma + \epsilon_{t}$$
#
# where $Z_{t-1}$ includes both $Y_{t-1}$ and $X_{t-1}$.
#
# The cases determine which deterministic terms are included in the model
# and which are tested as part of the test.
#
# 1. No deterministic terms
# 2. Constant included in both the model and the test
# 3. Constant included in the model but not in the test
# 4. Constant and trend included in the model, only trend included in the
# test
# 5. Constant and trend included in the model, neither included in the
# test
#
# Here we run the test on the Danish money demand data set. Here we see
# the test statistic is above the 95% critical value for both the lower and
# upper.
#
#
# Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing
# approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of applied
# econometrics, 16(3), 289-326.
ecm = UECM(data.lrm, 3, data[["lry", "ibo", "ide"]], 3, trend="c")
ecm_fit = ecm.fit()
bounds_test = ecm_fit.bounds_test(case=4)
bounds_test
bounds_test.crit_vals
# Case 3 also rejects the null of no levels relationship.
ecm = UECM(data.lrm, 3, data[["lry", "ibo", "ide"]], 3, trend="c")
ecm_fit = ecm.fit()
bounds_test = ecm_fit.bounds_test(case=3)
bounds_test
|