Uribe & Schmitt-Grohe

This forum is closed. You can read the posts but cannot write. We have migrated the forum to a new location where you will have to reset your password.
Forum rules
This forum is closed. You can read the posts but cannot write. We have migrated the forum to a new location (https://forum.dynare.org) where you will have to reset your password.

Re: Uribe & Schmitt-Grohe

Postby RMB » Wed Apr 15, 2015 7:39 pm

Pfeiffer,

I am trying to incorporate your suggestions. The results are incredible fast now, when I put the analytical steady state.
I really would like, if you want and have some time, that you run my model and see if the results seems to you reasonable.

Thanks a lot,
Raphael
Attachments
perua.xls
(37 KiB) Downloaded 103 times
uribe_chapter4_peru_bayes3.mod
(2.53 KiB) Downloaded 72 times
RMB
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:20 am

Re: Uribe & Schmitt-Grohe

Postby jpfeifer » Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:04 pm

There are a whole bunch of issues.

1. You are neglecting parameter dependence. Your calibration only once updates the other parameters depending on the estimated one. That’s why you should use model-local variables (the ones with the pound operator) or a steady state file. See Remark 4 (Parameter dependence and the use of model-local variables) in Pfeifer(2013): "A Guide to Specifying Observation Equations for the Estimation of DSGE Models" https://sites.google.com/site/pfeiferecon/Pfeifer_2013_Observation_Equations.pdf. I corrected this in the attached file.
2. Your investment FOC looks wrong. Why is there an I when only K is inside the adjustment costs in the budget constraint? You need to check/fix this. I presume you try to replicate http://www.columbia.edu/~mu2166/closing/edeir_model.m
3. Your priors are too narrow for some parameters. I widened them in the attached file.
4. You should better use a different mode-finder. I use 9 in the attached file
5. How did you detrend your data?
6. How did you calibrate the measurement error?
Attachments
uribe_chapter4_peru_bayes_corrected.mod
Investment FOC is still wrong
(2.67 KiB) Downloaded 86 times
------------
Johannes Pfeifer
University of Cologne
https://sites.google.com/site/pfeiferecon/
jpfeifer
 
Posts: 6940
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 4:02 pm
Location: Cologne, Germany

Re: Uribe & Schmitt-Grohe

Postby RMB » Wed Apr 22, 2015 7:56 pm

jpfeifer wrote:There are a whole bunch of issues.

1. You are neglecting parameter dependence. Your calibration only once updates the other parameters depending on the estimated one. That’s why you should use model-local variables (the ones with the pound operator) or a steady state file. See Remark 4 (Parameter dependence and the use of model-local variables) in Pfeifer(2013): "A Guide to Specifying Observation Equations for the Estimation of DSGE Models" https://sites.google.com/site/pfeiferecon/Pfeifer_2013_Observation_Equations.pdf. I corrected this in the attached file.
2. Your investment FOC looks wrong. Why is there an I when only K is inside the adjustment costs in the budget constraint? You need to check/fix this. I presume you try to replicate http://www.columbia.edu/~mu2166/closing/edeir_model.m
3. Your priors are too narrow for some parameters. I widened them in the attached file.
4. You should better use a different mode-finder. I use 9 in the attached file
5. How did you detrend your data?
6. How did you calibrate the measurement error?



Pfeifer,

You are correct about these issues. I would like to add some comments:
1. Sure, I really neglected it. I am reading the remark and I will adjust the code to consider it;
2. I am reading the FOC and I have to remember what kind of adaptation I had done. I will consider your note about it. Actually, I am trying to replicate some of Uribe's models, from his manuscripts (http://www.columbia.edu/~mu2166/book/oem.pdf), this one is chapter4;
3. Yes, I put too narrow because I was afraid my computer would take a lot of time to process it, but the case is just the opposite, because too narrow is not solving the problem;
4. The mode-finder I hadn't this information. I saw in the Dynare Reference Manual, page 51 (item 13), that this option 9 is not listed. I would like to know about it, if you have references;
5. I had detrended them by quadratic time. First, I applied logarithm to them and so I have applied quadratic time detrending. I have listened about other methods, but I chose this for all series used;
6. That is a important question. I do not know to calibrate the measurement error, so, I used it form the book. If you have any reference about, I will be very grateful to know.

I think that's all. I will take some time to see these points (1, 2, mainly). However, I am following your comments during the job.
Thanks again for help.
Raphael
RMB
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:20 am

Re: Uribe & Schmitt-Grohe

Postby jpfeifer » Sun Apr 26, 2015 8:51 am

2. That is the model where I linked to the codes. There you can look up the correct FOCs.
5. You can find out more about CMAES in Martin Møller Andreasen (2009): How to Maximize the Likelihood Function for a DSGE Model, DOI:10.1007/s10614-009-9182-6
6. There is no guidance, but if you are not sure, estimate the standard deviation.
------------
Johannes Pfeifer
University of Cologne
https://sites.google.com/site/pfeiferecon/
jpfeifer
 
Posts: 6940
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 4:02 pm
Location: Cologne, Germany

Re: Uribe & Schmitt-Grohe

Postby RMB » Tue Apr 28, 2015 8:30 pm

Pfeifer,

I have fixed the investment FOC.
Code: Select all
exp(lambda)*(1+phi*(exp(k)-exp(k(-1)))) = beta*exp(lambda(+1))*(alpha*exp(y(+1))/exp(k)+1-delta+phi*(exp(k(+1))-exp(k)));

But, the errors returned.

Error using chol
Matrix must be positive definite.
Error in metropolis_hastings_initialization (line 68)
d = chol(vv);
Error in random_walk_metropolis_hastings (line 62)
[ ix2, ilogpo2, ModelName, MetropolisFolder, fblck, fline, npar, nblck, nruns, NewFile,
MAX_nruns, d ] = ...
Error in dynare_estimation_1 (line 782)
feval(options_.posterior_sampling_method,objective_function,options_.proposal_distribution,xparam1,invhess,bounds,dataset_,options_,M_,estim_params_,bayestopt_,oo_);
Error in dynare_estimation (line 89)
dynare_estimation_1(var_list,dname);
Error in uribe_chapter4_peru_bayes_corrected (line 232)
dynare_estimation(var_list_);
Error in dynare (line 180)
evalin('base',fname) ;


Do you know what possible it will be wrong? It's again the chol error. Because before, it was an identification problem, but and now?
Attachments
perua.xls
(37 KiB) Downloaded 95 times
uribe_chapter4_peru_bayes_corrected.mod
(2.67 KiB) Downloaded 61 times
RMB
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:20 am

Re: Uribe & Schmitt-Grohe

Postby RMB » Thu Apr 30, 2015 2:59 pm

It's funny because when I just write the FOC investment like Uribe did in MatLab code, for example:
Code: Select all
e6 = -la* (1+PHI*(kp-k)) + BETTA * lap * (1-DELTA + ALFA * ap * (kp/hp)^(ALFA-1) + PHI * (kfup-kp));

like,
Code: Select all
exp(lambda)*(1+phi*(exp(k)-exp(k(-1)))) = beta*exp(lambda(+1))*(alpha*a(+1)*(exp(k)/exp(h(+1)))^(alpha-1)+1-delta+phi*(exp(k(+1))-exp(k)));

I have errors too.
I think write alpha*a(+1)*(exp(k)/exp(h(+1)))^(alpha-1) or alpha*exp(y(+1))/exp(k), there is not differences, but there is!

Other thing is Dynare stops in Figure 15 - Mode Check plots, and the graphics for phi and omega there are discontinuity points. I do not know whether this can mean the error is in there, but it was an observation of mime.

Well, I still desperate about my model. A little shocked because always the same has showed a mistake.
RMB
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:20 am

Re: Uribe & Schmitt-Grohe

Postby jpfeifer » Tue May 05, 2015 3:50 pm

When using
Code: Select all
exp(lambda)*(1+phi*(exp(k)-exp(k(-1)))) = beta*exp(lambda(+1))*(alpha*a(+1)*(exp(k)/exp(h(+1)))^(alpha-1)+1-delta+phi*(exp(k(+1))-exp(k)));

you forgot that there must be an exp() around the a(+1). When you put it there, it is identical.

Regarding the error message you get, you need to play around with different mode-finders. In the current iteration of your file, it works with mode_compute=6 (the default). Regarding the red points, see the description of mode_check in Pfeifer (2014): An Introduction to Graphs in Dynare at https://sites.google.com/site/pfeiferecon/dynare
------------
Johannes Pfeifer
University of Cologne
https://sites.google.com/site/pfeiferecon/
jpfeifer
 
Posts: 6940
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 4:02 pm
Location: Cologne, Germany

Re: Uribe & Schmitt-Grohe

Postby RMB » Tue May 19, 2015 6:57 pm

Dear Pfeifer,

I think I got it. This is the dynare's code for Chapter 4 of Uribe,

Sorry for later, but I am waiting for running the code on other computer to verify if it was correct.
Any comments would be appreciate.

Thanks for help!
Attachments
perua.xls
(37 KiB) Downloaded 189 times
uribe_chapter4_peru_bayes_corrected.mod
(2.69 KiB) Downloaded 71 times
RMB
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:20 am

Previous

Return to Dynare help

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 6 guests