I Maximum likelihood to fit a parameter of this model

member 428835
Hi PF!

Given random time series data ##y_i##, we assume the data follows a EWMA (exponential weighted moving average) model: ##\sigma_t^2 = \lambda\sigma_{t-1}^2 + (1-\lambda)y_{t-1}^2## for ##t > 250##, where ##\sigma_t## is the standard deviation, and ##\sigma_{M=250}^2 = \sum_{i=1}^{250}y_i^2/250## to initialize. How would we use maximum likelihood to estimate ##\lambda##?

In general, it seems to use the principal we first choose a distribution ##P(y_i)## the data likely came from ( like a Bernoulli variable maybe for flipping a coin and estimating probability of heads ##p##, or normal distribution if we've been given heights of people as a sample and want to estimate the mean, standard deviation). Next, since the data are i.i.d. (we assume this is true) we optimize ##\Pi_i P(y_i)## with respect to the variable we seek (##p## or ##\mu## in the previous examples, in this question should be ##\lambda##). I'm just confused how the assumed model with ##\sigma## plays a role. Any help is greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The squaring just adds unnecessary superscripts for this exercise so let's write ##S_i## for ##\sigma^2_i## and ##X_i## for ##y_i^2##.

Typically we assume the ##X_i## are iid. Say the distribution of ##X_i## has parameters ##\mathbf \beta=\langle \beta_1,...,\beta_K\rangle##, and the probability density function of ##X_i## is ##f_{\mathbf \beta}##. We need to estimate ##\mathbf\beta## and ##\lambda## given observations ##s_1, ...,, s_n## for the random variables ##S_1, ..., S_N##.

Given the equations
$$S_t = \lambda S_{t-1} + (1-\lambda)Y_{t-1}$$
for ##t=2,...N##
and the missing equation ##S_1=X_1##
we can write the realized values ##x_1,..., x_N## of the random variables ##X_1,..., X_N## in terms of just ##\lambda## by inserting the observed values of ##S_1, ..., S_N##. Write these as ##x_1(\lambda),..., X_N(\lambda)## to emphasise this dependence.

The likelihood of the observed data given ##\mathbf \beta,\lambda## is
$$\mathscr L (\mathbf \beta,\lambda)=
\prod_{i=1}^N
f_{\mathbf\beta}(x_i(\lambda))$$

This expression has ##K+1## unknowns: ##\beta_1, ..., \beta_K, \lambda##. We partially differentiate it wrt each of those unknowns in turn and set it equal to zero, to get ##K+1## equations, the same number as we have unknowns. Solving those equations leads to the ML estimators of those unknowns.

Note how we needed the density function of ##X_i## to form the expression for ##\mathscr L##.
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top