Research article Special Issues

A new variant of estimation approach to asymmetric stochastic volatilitymodel

  • Received: 31 August 2017 Accepted: 23 April 2018 Published: 09 May 2018
  • JEL Codes: C10, C11, C13, C15, C22, C58, C53

  • This paper proposes a novel simulation-based inference for an asymmetric stochastic volatility model. An acceptance-rejection Metropolis-Hastings algorithm is developed for the simulation of latent states of the model. A simple and e cient algorithm is also developed for estimation of a heavy-tailed stochastic volatility model. Simulation studies show that our proposed methods give rise to reasonable parameter estimates. Our proposed estimation methods are then used to analyze a benchmark data set of asset returns.

    Citation: Zhongxian Men, Tony S. Wirjanto. A new variant of estimation approach to asymmetric stochastic volatilitymodel[J]. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2018, 2(2): 325-347. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2018.2.325

    Related Papers:

    [1] Cenap Özel, Habib Basbaydar, Yasar Sñzen, Erol Yilmaz, Jung Rye Lee, Choonkil Park . On Reidemeister torsion of flag manifolds of compact semisimple Lie groups. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 7562-7581. doi: 10.3934/math.2020484
    [2] Yunfeng Tang, Huixin Yin, Miaomiao Han . Star edge coloring of K2,t-free planar graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(6): 13154-13161. doi: 10.3934/math.2023664
    [3] Xiuhai Fei, Zhonghua Wang, Cuixian Lu, Haifang Zhang . Higher Jordan triple derivations on -type trivial extension algebras. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 6933-6950. doi: 10.3934/math.2024338
    [4] Gurninder S. Sandhu, Deepak Kumar . A note on derivations and Jordan ideals of prime rings. AIMS Mathematics, 2017, 2(4): 580-585. doi: 10.3934/Math.2017.4.580
    [5] Jung-Chao Ban, Chih-Hung Chang . Entropy dimension of shifts of finite type on free groups. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 5121-5139. doi: 10.3934/math.2020329
    [6] Limin Liu, Hongjin Liu . Consistent pairs of s-torsion pairs in extriangulated categories with negative first extensions. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(1): 1494-1508. doi: 10.3934/math.2024073
    [7] Jin Cai, Shuangliang Tian, Lizhen Peng . On star and acyclic coloring of generalized lexicographic product of graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14270-14281. doi: 10.3934/math.2022786
    [8] Rashad Abdel-Baky, Mohamed Khalifa Saad . Some characterizations of dual curves in dual 3-space D3. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(4): 3339-3351. doi: 10.3934/math.2021200
    [9] Jin Yang, Zhenzhen Wei . The optimal problems for torsional rigidity. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(5): 4597-4613. doi: 10.3934/math.2021271
    [10] Hui Chen . Characterizations of normal cancellative monoids. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(1): 302-318. doi: 10.3934/math.2024018
  • This paper proposes a novel simulation-based inference for an asymmetric stochastic volatility model. An acceptance-rejection Metropolis-Hastings algorithm is developed for the simulation of latent states of the model. A simple and e cient algorithm is also developed for estimation of a heavy-tailed stochastic volatility model. Simulation studies show that our proposed methods give rise to reasonable parameter estimates. Our proposed estimation methods are then used to analyze a benchmark data set of asset returns.


    Consider a non trivial group A and take an element t not in A. Consider an equation,

    s(t)=a1tp1a2tp2...antpn=1,

    where, ajϵA, pj = ±1 and aj 1 if it appears between two cyclically adjacent t having exponents with different signs. The equation s(t)=1 is solvable over the group A if it has a solution in some group extension of A. Precisely, let G be a group containing A, if there exist an injective homomorphism, say λ:AG, such that, g1gp1g2gp2gngpn=1 in G, where gj=λ(aj) and gG then the equation s(t)=1 is solvable over A. A conjecture stated in [2] by Levin asserts that if A is torsion- free, then every equation over A is solvable. Bibi and Edjvet [1], using in particular results of Prishchepov [3], has shown that the conjecture is true for equations of length at most seven. Here we prove the following: Theorem: The singular equation,

    s(t)=atbt1ctdtet1ftgt1ht1=1,

    of length eight is solvable over any torsion-free group.

    Levin showed that any equation over a torsion-free group is solvable if the exponent sum p1+p2+pn is same as length of the equation. Stallings proved that any equation of the form a1ta2tamtb1t1b2t1bnt1=1, is solvable over torsion-free group. Klyachko showed that any equation with exponent sum ±1 is solvable over torsion free group.

    All necessary definitions concerning relative presentations and pictures can be found in [4]. A relative group presentation P is a triplet <A,t|r> where A is a group, t is disjoint from A and r is a set of cyclically reduced words in A<t>. If the relative presentation P is orientable and aspherical then the natural homomorphism AG is injective. P is orientable and aspherical implies s(t)=1 is solvable. We use weighttest to establish asphericity. The star graph Γ of a relative presentation P=<A,t|r> is a directed graph with vertex set {t,t1} and edges set r, the set of all cyclic permutations of elements of {r,r1} which begin with t or t1. Sr write S=Tαj where αjA and T begins and ends with t or t1. The initial function i(S) is the inverse of last symbol of T and terminal function τ(S) is the first symbol of T. The labeling function on the edges is defined by π(S)=αj and is extended to paths in the usual way. A weight function θ on the star graph Γ is a real valued function given to the edges of Γ. If d is an edge of Γ, then θ(d) = θ(ˉd). A weight function θ is aspherical if the following three conditions are satisfied:

    (1) Let R ϵr be cyclically reduced word, say R=tϵ11a1...tϵnnan, where ϵi = ±1 and ai A. Then,

    nι=1(1θ(tϵιιaι...tϵnnantϵ11a1...tϵι1ι1aι1))2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle in Γ has weight at least 2.

    (3) Each edge of Γ has a non-negative weight.

    The relative presentation P is aspherical if Γ admits an aspherical weight function. For convenience we write s(t)=1 as,

    s(t)=atbt1ctdtet1ftgt1ht1=1,

    where a,b,c,e,f,gA/{1} and d,hA. Moreover, by applying the transformation y=td, if necessary, it can be assumed without any loss that d=1 in A.

    (1) Since c(2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3) = 0, so at least 3 admissible cycles must be of order 2.

    (2) ac and ac1 implies c2 = 1, a contradiction.

    (3) af and af1 implies f2 = 1, a contradiction.

    (4) be and be1 implies e2 = 1, a contradiction.

    (5) bg and bg1 implies g2 = 1, a contradiction.

    (6) If two of ac, af and cf1 are admissible then so is the third.

    (7) If two of ac1, af1 and cf1 are admissible then so is the third.

    (8) If two of ac,cf and af1 are admissible then so is the third.

    (9) If two of ac1, af and cf are admissible then so is the third.

    (10) If two of be,eg, bg1 are admissible then so is the third.

    (11) If two of be1, eg and bg are admissible then so is the third.

    (1) a=c1,b=e1

    (2) a=c1,b=g1

    (3) a=c1,e=g1

    (4) a=c1,d=h1

    (5) a=c1,b=e

    (6) a=c1,b=g

    (7) a=c,b=g1

    (8) a=c,e=g1

    (9) a=c,d=h1

    (10) a=c,b=e

    (11) a=c,b=g

    (12) a=c,e=g

    (13) a=f1,b=g1

    (14) a=f1,d=h1

    (15) a=f1,b=g

    (16) c=f1,b=e1

    (17) c=f1,b=g1

    (18) c=f1,d=h1

    (19) c=f1,b=e

    (20) c=f1,b=g

    (21) c=f1,e=g

    (22) a=f,d=h1

    (23) a=f,b=e

    (24) a=f,b=g

    (25) c=f,b=g1

    (26) c=f,e=g1

    (27) c=f,d=h1

    (28) c=f,b=e

    (29) b=e,d=h1

    (30) a=c1,a=f1,d=h1

    (31) a=c1,a=f1,c=f

    (32) a=c1,a=f,c=f1

    (33) a=c1,c=f1,d=h1

    (34) a=c1,c=f,d=h1

    (35) a=c,a=f,c=f

    (36) a=c,a=f1,c=f1

    (37) a=f1,c=f1,d=h1

    (38) a=f1,c=f,d=h1

    (39) a=f,c=f1,d=h1

    (40) a=f,c=f,d=h1

    (41) b=e1,b=g1,d=h1

    (42) b=e1,b=g1,e=g

    (43) b=e,b=g1,e=g1

    (44) b=e1,b=g,e=g1

    (45) b=e1,b=g,d=h1

    (46) b=g1,e=g1,d=h1

    (47) b=g1,e=g,d=h1

    (48) b=g,e=g1,d=h1

    (49) b=g,e=g,d=h1

    (50) a=c1,a=f,c=f1,d=h1

    (51) a=c1,a=f1,c=f,d=h1

    (52) a=c1,b=e,b=g1,d=h1

    (53) a=c,a=f1,c=f1,d=h1

    (54) a=c,a=f,c=f,d=h1

    (55) b=e1,b=g1,e=g,d=h1

    (56) a=c1,b=e,b=g1,e=g1,d=h1

    (57) a=c,a=f,c=f,b=e1,d=h1

    (58) a=c,a=f,c=f,b=e,d=h1

    (59) c=f,b=e,b=g1,e=g1,d=h1

    (60) a=c,a=f1,c=f1,b=e1,b=g1,d=h1

    (61) a=c,a=f,c=f,b=e1,b=g1,d=h1

    (62) a=f1,c=f,b=e1,b=g,e=g1,d=h1

    (63) a=f,c=f1,b=e,b=g1,e=g1,d=h1

    (64) a=f,c=f1,b=e1,b=g,e=g1,d=h1

    (65) a=c1,a=f,c=f1,b=e,b=g1,e=g1,d=h1

    (66) a=c1,a=f1,c=f,b=e1,b=g,e=g1,d=h1

    (67) a=c,a=f,c=f,b=e1,b=g,e=g1,d=h1

    Recall that P=<A,t|s(t)>=1 where s(t)=atbt1ctdtet1ftgt1ht1=1 and a,b,c,e,f,gA/{1} and d,hA. We will show that some cases of the given equation are solvable by applying the weight test. Also the transformation y=td, leads to the assumption that d=1 in A.

    In this case the relative presentation P is given as :

    P=<A,t|s(t)=atbt1ctdtet1ftgt1ht1>

    = <A,t|s(t)=c1te1t1ct2et1ftgt1ht1=1>.

    Suppose, x=tet1 which implies that x1=te1t1.

    Using above substitutions in relative presentation we have new presentation

    Q=<A,t,x|t1c1x1ctxftgt1h=1=x1tet1>. Observe that in new presentation Q we have two relators R1=t1c1x1ctxftgt1h and R2=x1tet1. The star graph Γ1 for new presentation Q is given by the Figure 1.

    Figure 1.   .

    Let γ1c1,γ2c,γ31,γ4f,γ5g,γ6h and η11,η2e,η31.

    Assign weights to the edges of the star graph Γ1 as follows:

    θ(γ1)=θ(γ2)=θ(η2)=1 and θ(γ3)=θ(γ4)=θ(γ5)=θ(γ5)=θ(γ6)=θ(η1)=θ(η3)=12. The given weight function θ is aspherical and all three conditions of weight test are satisfied.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(1+1+12+12+12)+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+1+0)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contraction. For example, γ3γ6η1 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies h=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1atbt1a1t2et1ftb1t1h and R2=ta1t1. The star graph Γ2 for new presentation Q is given by the Figure 1.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(0+1+1+12+1+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+1+1)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example γ6γ3η1 is a cycle of length 2, having weight less than 2, which implies h=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xbx1tg1t1ftgt1h and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ2 for new presentation Q is given by the Figure 1.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(0+1+1+12+1+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+1+0)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ5η3γ1η3 is a cycles of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies b=g1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each admissible cycle has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xbx1et1ftg and R2=t1a1t2. The star graph Γ3 for the relative presentation is given by the Figure 1.

    (1) Observe that (1θ(γj))=4(0+1+12+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=4(0+12+1+12)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xbx1tbt1ftgt1ht1 and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ4 for the relative presentation is given by the Figure 1.

    (1) Observe that (1θ(γj))=7(0+1+1+1+12+12+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+12+1+12)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ5η3γ1η3 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies g=b1 a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axa1t2et1fxh and R2=x1tb1t1. The star graph Γ5 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 2.

    Figure 2.   .

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+1+12+1+12+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+12+0)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ6γ3η3 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies h=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight,

    In this case we have two relators R1=xg1xtet1ftgt1h and R2=x1t1ct. The star graph Γ6 for the relative presentation is given by the Figure 2.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(32+12+1+12+12+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+1+0)=2

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction, For example, the cycle γ1η1η3, γ6η1η3γ2 and γ6η1η3γ1 are the cycles of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies g=1, h=1 and h=g, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xht1atbt1atx1f and R2=x1tgt1. The star graph Γ7 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 2.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+1+1+1+12+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+12+0)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For Example η2γ5γ1 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies g=h1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbxtet1ftg and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ8 for the relative presentation is given by the Figure 2.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+32+0+12+12+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+1+0)=2.

    (2) Each edge having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ2η1η3 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies b=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axatxftgt1h and R2=x1tb1t1. The star graph Γ9 for the relative presentation is given by the Figure 3.

    Figure 3.   .

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(1+12+12+12+1+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+12+12)=2.

    (2) Each edge having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ6γ5η1 is a cycles of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies that h=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axat2et1fxh and R2=x1tgt1. The star graph Γ10 for the relative presentation is given by the Figure 3.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+1+12+1+12+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+12+0)=2.

    (2) Each edge having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ6γ3η3 is a cycles of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies that h=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1ctbt1axfx1th and R2=x1t2et1. The star graph Γ11 for the relative presentation is given by the Figure 3.

    (1) Observe that (1θ(γj))=6(1+12+0+12+1+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=4(1+0+12+12)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xbt1ct2ex1b1t1h and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ12 for the relative presentation is given by the Figure 3.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+12+0+1+1+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+1+0)=2.

    (2) Each edge having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ6γ3η1 is a cycles of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies that h=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbt1ct2exg and R2=x1t1ft. The star graph Γ13 for the relative presentation is given by the Figure 4.

    Figure 4.   .

    (1) (1θ(γj))=6(12+12+1+1+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+12+12)=2.

    (2) Each edge having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ6γ4γ1 amd γ6γ5η1η3 are the cycles of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies g=1 and g=e1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xbt1ct2ex1bt1h and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ13 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 4.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+1+1+12+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+12+12)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ6η1γ3 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies h=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1ac1tx1ctxgt1h and R2=x1tb1t1c1t. The star graph Γ14 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 4.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(1+12+1+1+12+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=4(0+1+12+12)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ6η1γ4 is a cycles of length 2, having weight less than 2, which implies h=1 a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axtex1h and R2=x1tbt1ct. The star graph Γ15 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 4.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=4(1+0+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=4(1+0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ4η4γ2γ1 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies h=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t2atbx1texg and R2=x1t1et1c1t. The star graph Γ16 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 4.

    (1) (1θ(γj))=4(1+1+12+12+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=4(12+12+12+12)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1atbxtbx1gt1h and R2=x1t1ct. The star graph Γ17 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 5.

    Figure 5.   .

    (1) (1θ(γj))=6(1+12+1+12+1+12+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+12+0)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ6η3γ3 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies h=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axct2et1c1tbt1h and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ18 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 5.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+1+12+1+12+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+12+0)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ6γ3η3 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies h=1 a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1atbxtex1et1h and R2=x1t1ct. The star graph Γ19 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 5.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+1+12+1+12+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+1+0)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ6η3γ3 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies h=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbt1ct2exg and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ20 for the Q relative presentation is given by the Figure 5.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(1+12+1+1+0+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+12+12)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axctxatget1h and R2=x1tbt1.

    The star graph Γ21 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 6.

    Figure 6.   .

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+12+1+12+12+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+12+12)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ6γ3η1, is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies h=1 a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xct2exh and R2=x1t1atbt1. The star graph Γ22 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 6.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=4(12+12+12+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=4(12+12+12+12)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ23η1 is a cycle of length 2, having weight less than 2, which implies e2=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1atg1xtexgt1h and R2=x1t1ft>. The star graph Γ23 for the relative presentation is given by the Figure 6.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(1+12+12+12+1+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+12+0)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ6η3γ3 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies h=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1atbxtexe1t1h and R2=x1t1ct. The star graph Γ23 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 6.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(1+12+12+12+1+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+12+0)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ6η3γ3 has weight less than 2, which implies h=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t2atbxtexg and R2=x1t1ct. The star graph Γ24 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 6.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(1+12+1+1+12+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+1+0)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight at least 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axt1cxctgt1h and R2=x1t2bt1. The star graph Γ25 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 7.

    Figure 7.   .

    (1) (1θ(γj))=4(12+12+12+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=4(12+12+12+12)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xcta1t2xftg and R2=x1t2atbt1. The star graph Γ26 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 7.

    (1) (1θ(γj))=6(1+12+1+12+12+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=5(12+1+12+12+12)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbx1tex1g and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ27 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 7.

    (1) (1θ(γj))=5(1+0+1+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axctx1fte1t1h and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ27 for the new presentation Q is given by the Figure 7.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(1+0+1+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xbx1tex1gt1h and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ27 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 7.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(0+1+1+0+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative watch.

    In this case we have two relators: R1=xbx1tet1c1tgt1h and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ28 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 7.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(0+1+1+1+12+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+12+12)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contrdiction. For example, γ5η3γ1 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies g=b1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbx1texg and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ29 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 8.

    Figure 8.   .

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(1+0+1+0+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbx1tex1g and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ30 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 8.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(1+0+1+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xbxtexgt1h and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ31 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 8.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(1+0+12+12+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+0+12)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xbxtex1gt1h and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ32 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 8.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(0+1+0+1+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(1+0+0)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbxtex1g and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ33 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 9.

    Figure 9.   .

    (1) Observe that (1θ(γj))=5(1+1+0+12+12)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+0+12)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbt1ct2ex1g and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ38 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 9.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(1+12+1+1+12+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+12+12)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ2γ16η1η3γ5 is the cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which leads to a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbx1texg and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ35 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 9.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(0+1+1+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(1+0+0)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbx1tbxb1 and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ35 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 9.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(1+0+1+0+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbxtexg and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ36 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 9.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(0+1+1+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(1+0+0)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axctx1fx1 and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ37 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 10.

    Figure 10.   .

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(12+12+1+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+12+0)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axctx1fx1h and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ37 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 9.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(12+12+1+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+0+12)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axctxfx1h and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ38 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 10.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(0+1+1+0+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2, so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axctx1fte1t1h and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ39 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 10.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+1+0+12+1+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+12+0)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example, γ5η1η3 is the cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2, which implies h=1, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axctx1fx and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ40 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 10.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+1+0+12+1+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+12+0)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=|t1axctxfx1 and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ41 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 11.

    Figure 11.   .

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+1+0+12+1+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+12+0)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axa1txfx1 and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ41 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 11.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(0+1+1+0+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=x1t1axctx1f and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ42 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 11.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(0+12+12+1+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+0+12)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xatbt1cx1f and R2=x1tbt2. The star graph Γ43 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 11.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+1+0+12+1+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+12+0)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xt1axctxf and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ44 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 11.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(12+12+12+12+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+0+12)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xbx1etxg and R2=x1t2c1t. The star graph Γ45 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 12.

    Figure 12.   .

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=4(0+1+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=4(1+0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbxtex1g and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ46 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 12.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(1+1+0+0+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(1+0+0)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbxtexg and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ47 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 12.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(1+1+0+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(1+0+0)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=x1t1axctx1f and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ48 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 12.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(0+0+1+1+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+0+0)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xc1x1tcx1f and R2=x1tb1t2. The star graph Γ49 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 13.

    Figure 13.   .

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=4(0+1+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=4(1+0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbxtb1xg and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ50 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 13.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(12+1+12+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+0+12=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example γ2η1γ15 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2 which implies b=g, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=|t1xbxtbxg and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ50 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 12.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(12+1+12+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+0+12)=2.

    (2) Each admissible cycle having weight less than 2 leads to a contradiction. For example γ2η1γ15 is a cycle of length 2 having weight less than 2 which implies b=g, a contradiction.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=x1t1axctxc and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ51 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 13.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(1+0+0+1+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xat1x1atxta1 and R2=x1tbt1t2. The star graph Γ52 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 13.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(0+1+0+1+1+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=4(0+0+1+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbxtb1xb1 and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ53 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 14.

    Figure 14.   .

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(12+1+12+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(12+0+12)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=xbt1x1bxtb1tb1 and R2=x1t1a1tbt1. The star graph Γ54 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 14.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=6(12+1+0+1+12+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=4(1+0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axa1txax1 and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ55 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 14.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(0+1+1+0+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbx1tb1xb and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ56 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 14.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(1+0+1+0+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1xbx1tb1x1b and R2=x1t1at. The star graph Γ57 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 14.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(1+0+1+1+0)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(0+0+1)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In this case we have two relators R1=t1axatx1ax and R2=x1tbt1. The star graph Γ58 for the relative presentation Q is given by the Figure 15.

    Figure 15.  Γ58.

    (1) Observe that, (1θ(γj))=5(1+0+1+0+1)=2 and (1θ(ηj))=3(1+0+0)=2.

    (2) Each possible admissible cycle has weight atleast 2 so θ admits an aspherical weight function.

    (3) Each edge has non-negative weight.

    In all the cases, 3 conditions of weight test are satisfied.

    Hence the equation s(t)=atbt1ctdtet1ftgt1ht1=1 where a,b,c,e,f,gA/{1} and d,hA is solvable.

    In this article, we reviewed some basic concepts of combinatorial group theory (like torsion-free group, equations over groups, relative presentation, weight test) and discussed the two main conjectures in equations over torsion-free groups. We investigated all possible cases and solved the singular equation of length eight over torsion free group by using weight test. This result will be useful in dealing with equations over torsion-free groups.

    The authors wish to express their gratitude to Prince Sultan University for facilitating the publication of this article through the Theoretical and Applied Sciences Lab.

    All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.

    [1] Bollerslev T (1986) Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity. J Econometrics 31: 307–327. doi: 10.1016/0304-4076(86)90063-1
    [2] Bauwens L, Lubrano M (1998) Bayesian inference on GARCH models using the Gibbs sampler. Economet J 1: C23–C26. doi: 10.1111/1368-423X.11003
    [3] Broto C, Ruiz E (2004) Estimation methods for stochastic volatility models: a survey. J Econ Surv 18: 613–649. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6419.2004.00232.x
    [4] Carnero A, Pena D, Ruiz E (2003) Persistence and kurtosis in GARCH and stochastic volatility models J Financ Economet 2: 319–342.
    [5] Chib S, Greenberg E (1995) Understanding the Metropolis-Hastings Algorithm. American Statistician 49: 327–335.
    [6] Chib S, Nardarib F, Shephard N (2006) Analysis of high dimensional multivariate stochastic volatility models. J Econometrics 134: 341–371. doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2005.06.026
    [7] Dobigeon N, Tourneret J (2010) Bayesian orthogonal component analysis for sparse representation. IEEE T Signal Proces 58: 2675–2685. doi: 10.1109/TSP.2010.2041594
    [8] Diebold FX, Guther TA, Tay AS (1998) Evaluating density forecasts with applications to financial risk management. Int Econ Rev 39: 863–883. doi: 10.2307/2527342
    [9] Engle RF (1982) Autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity with estimates of the variance of United Kingdom inflation. Econometrica 50: 987–1007. doi: 10.2307/1912773
    [10] Eraker B, Johannes M, Polson N (2003) The Impact ofJumps inVolatility and Returns. J Financ 58: 1269–1300. doi: 10.1111/1540-6261.00566
    [11] Geweke J (1993) Bayesian treatment of the independent Student-t linear model. J Appl Econom 8: S19–S40. doi: 10.1002/jae.3950080504
    [12] Harvey AC, Shephard N (1996) Estimation of an asymmetric stochastic volatility model for asset returns. J Bus Econ Stat 14: 42-434.
    [13] Jacquier E, Polson NG, Rossi PE (2004) Bayesian analysis of stochastic volatility models with fat-tails and correlated errors. J Econometrics 122: 185–212. doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2003.09.001
    [14] Kawakatsu H (2007) Numerical integration-based Gaussian mixture filters for maximum likelihood estimation of asymmetric stochastic volatility models. Economet 10: 342–358. doi: 10.1111/j.1368-423X.2007.00211.x
    [15] Kim S, Shephard N, Chib S (1998) Stochastic volatility: Likelihood inference and comparison with ARCH models. Rev Econ Stud 65: 361–393. doi: 10.1111/1467-937X.00050
    [16] Liesenfeld R, Richard J (2003) Univariate and multivariate stochastic volatility models: estimation and diagnostics. J Empiri Financ 45: 505–531.
    [17] Melino A, Turnbull SM (1990) Pricing foreign currencyoptions with stochastic volatility. J Econometrics 45: 239–265. doi: 10.1016/0304-4076(90)90100-8
    [18] Men Z (2012) Bayesian Inference for Stochastic Volatility Models. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science at the University of Waterloo.
    [19] Men Z, McLeish D, Kolkiewicz A, et al. (2017) Comparison of Asymmetric Stochastic Volatility Models under Di erent Correlation Structures. J Appl Stat 44: 1350–1368. doi: 10.1080/02664763.2016.1204596
    [20] Men Z, Kolkiewicz A, Wirjanto TS (2015) Bayesian Analysis of Asymmetric Stochastic Conditional Duration Model. J Forecasting 34: 36–56. doi: 10.1002/for.2317
    [21] Mira A, Tierney L (2002) E ciency and Convergence Properties of Slice Samplers. Scand J Stat 29: 1–12. doi: 10.1111/1467-9469.00267
    [22] Neal RN (2003) Slice sampling. Annals Stat 31: 705–767. doi: 10.1214/aos/1056562461
    [23] Omori Y, Chib S, Shephard N, et al. (2007) Stochastic volatility with leverage: Fast and e cient likelihood inference. J Econometrics 140: 425–449. doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2006.07.008
    [24] Pitt MK, Shephard N (1999a) Time varying covariances: A factor stochastic volatility approach. Bayesian Stat 6: 547–570.
    [25] Pitt M, Shephard N (1999b) Filtering via simulation: Auxiliary particle filters. J Am Stat Assoc 94: 590–599.
    [26] Roberts GO, Rosenthal JS (1999) Convergence of Slice Sampler Markov Chains. J R Stat Soc B 61: 643–660. doi: 10.1111/1467-9868.00198
    [27] Shephard N, Pitt MK (1997) Likelihood Analysis of non-Gaussian Measurement Time Series. Biometrika 84: 653–667. doi: 10.1093/biomet/84.3.653
    [28] Taylor SJ (1986) Modelling Financial Time Series, Chichester: Wiley.
    [29] Wirjanto TS, Kolkiewicz A, Men Z (2016) Bayesian Analysis of a Threshold Stochastic Volatility Model. J Forecasting 35: 462–476. doi: 10.1002/for.2397
    [30] Yu J (2005) On leverage in a stochastic volatility model. J Econometrics 127: 165–178. doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2004.08.002
    [31] Yu J, Meyer R (2006) Multivariate stochastic volatility models: Bayesian estimation and model comparison. Economet Rev 51: 2218–2231.
    [32] Zhang X, King L (2008) Box-Cox stochastic volatility models with heavy-tails and correlated errors. J Empiri Financ 15: 549–566. doi: 10.1016/j.jempfin.2007.05.002
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2018 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(4268) PDF downloads(1040) Cited by(2)

Article outline

Figures and Tables

Figures(10)  /  Tables(4)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog