By Topic

Finite sample properties of ARMA order selection

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

2 Author(s)
Broersen, P.M.T. ; Dept. of Multi Scale Phys., Delft Univ. of Technol., Netherlands ; de Waele, S.

The cost of order selection is defined as the loss in model quality due to selection. It is the difference between the quality of the best of all available candidate models that have been estimated from a finite sample of N observations and the quality of the model that is actually selected. The order selection criterion itself has an influence on the cost because of the penalty factor for each additionally selected parameter. Also, the number of competitive candidate models for the selection is important. The number of candidates is, of itself, small for the nested and hierarchical autoregressive/moving average (ARMA) models. However, intentionally reducing the number of selection candidates can be beneficial in combined ARMA(p,q) models, where two separate model orders are involved: the AR order p and the MA order q. The selection cost can be diminished by creating a nested sequence of ARMA(r,r-1) models. Moreover, not evaluating every combination (p,q) of the orders considerably reduces the required computation time. The disadvantage may be that the true ARMA(p,q) model is no longer among the nested candidate models. However, in finite samples, this disadvantage is largely compensated for by the reduction in the cost of order selection by considering fewer candidates. Thus, the quality of the selected model remains acceptable with only hierarchically nested ARMA(r,r-1) models as candidates.

Published in:

Instrumentation and Measurement, IEEE Transactions on  (Volume:53 ,  Issue: 3 )