<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Case Against VARs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/the-case-against-vars/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/the-case-against-vars/</link>
	<description>taking the most charitable view of those who disagree</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2020 14:00:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.32</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ScottA</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/the-case-against-vars/#comment-407239</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ScottA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Feb 2014 19:14:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=2738#comment-407239</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A lot of academics have the strange idea that making regressions more complex  can eliminate the problem with regressions. Some of the problems can be mitigated (some problematic assumptions, distributional issues, auto-correlation, etc) but it&#039;s always good to remind everyone that the basic nature of the process (non-experimental data with massive quantities of unknown or latent influences) can&#039;t be mathematized-away. Any thoughts on simulation/agent-based modeling as a substitute? Particularly where grounded in observed data.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A lot of academics have the strange idea that making regressions more complex  can eliminate the problem with regressions. Some of the problems can be mitigated (some problematic assumptions, distributional issues, auto-correlation, etc) but it&#8217;s always good to remind everyone that the basic nature of the process (non-experimental data with massive quantities of unknown or latent influences) can&#8217;t be mathematized-away. Any thoughts on simulation/agent-based modeling as a substitute? Particularly where grounded in observed data.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt Young</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/the-case-against-vars/#comment-389541</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matt Young]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Feb 2014 16:34:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=2738#comment-389541</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I can invent a term. Vector auto entropy. Replace time with probability of occurance. Replace regression with entropy. Works pretty well and is nothing but structural.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can invent a term. Vector auto entropy. Replace time with probability of occurance. Replace regression with entropy. Works pretty well and is nothing but structural.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: S</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/the-case-against-vars/#comment-389492</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[S]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Feb 2014 15:26:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=2738#comment-389492</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I use VARs to project loss severity and frequency for insurance exposure. Mostly it they me some kind of covariance to work with, and I have found that they are usually more skillful than someone just arm waving a selected value (which is what is usually done). There are exogenous factors that the models cannot possibly know about, so I try to do my best to adjust the data before the model is fit, that and, dummy variables help.

Anyway, I have no idea how broad your dislike of the method is, but I was curious if there was any instance where you thought they might be appropriate, or at least better than nothing?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I use VARs to project loss severity and frequency for insurance exposure. Mostly it they me some kind of covariance to work with, and I have found that they are usually more skillful than someone just arm waving a selected value (which is what is usually done). There are exogenous factors that the models cannot possibly know about, so I try to do my best to adjust the data before the model is fit, that and, dummy variables help.</p>
<p>Anyway, I have no idea how broad your dislike of the method is, but I was curious if there was any instance where you thought they might be appropriate, or at least better than nothing?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
