How do I estimate using ML instead of the Bayesian approach?
Thank you for your help!
Dynare forums
Forums for asking questions, posting comments and uploading examples related to Dynare
Maximum Likelihood
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.
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.
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
by MichelJuillard » Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:24 pm
For each estimated parameters, you enter only the name of the parameter and the initial value for the optimization. The exact syntax is in the manual
Best
Michel
Best
Michel
- MichelJuillard
- Posts: 680
- Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 10:51 am
by MichelJuillard » Mon Jan 21, 2008 4:32 pm
Not at the tip of my finders. You rather send the *.mod file that isn't working
Best
Michel
Best
Michel
- MichelJuillard
- Posts: 680
- Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 10:51 am
by bk » Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:42 am
Here is the .mod file and the data. This is just a test model, so the parameter values, the parameter distributions and the data are more or less arbitrarily chosen.
- Attachments
-
datam.m- (565 Bytes) Downloaded 150 times
-
- liten_estML.mod
- (939 Bytes) Downloaded 178 times
- bk
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 12:16 pm
by bk » Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:06 am
Here's an edited version of liten_estML.mod. I think I got it anyway?
- Attachments
-
- liten_estML.mod
- (1.01 KiB) Downloaded 354 times
- bk
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 12:16 pm
by glucke » Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:16 pm
May I initiate one question? I'll use this .mod file and this data for illustrating.
It concerns that results of MLE depends on optimization algorithm. When we use “mode_compute=4” results are looked OK. But if another optimization algorithm is used (for example fminsearch) results became strange (likelihood functions is better, but few t-statistics are extremely large. It should mean that bound is near). It should be noted that problem of bound happens very often when I finished optimization.
Let’s describe an example. When we use “mode_compute=4” with all restrictions as at file, target (minus log-likelihood) functions value is larger then 79. All t-stats are reasonable. If we use “alternative search” with all restrictions as at file, target functions value is about 75.3. But parameters are equal to bound. So, t-stats are extremely high.
When we use “mode_compute=4” without parameters restrictions, target functions value is about “41,59”. “54,46” is highest value of t-stat. When we use “alternative search” without parameters restrictions, target functions value is about “41,56”. But “10097” is highest value of t-stat. So, we have extremely high difference at t-stat even with situation when likelihood function values are close.
It’s really interesting to hear any comments or ideas about this situation.
PS File “res.txt” contains results of optimization of described cases.
It concerns that results of MLE depends on optimization algorithm. When we use “mode_compute=4” results are looked OK. But if another optimization algorithm is used (for example fminsearch) results became strange (likelihood functions is better, but few t-statistics are extremely large. It should mean that bound is near). It should be noted that problem of bound happens very often when I finished optimization.
Let’s describe an example. When we use “mode_compute=4” with all restrictions as at file, target (minus log-likelihood) functions value is larger then 79. All t-stats are reasonable. If we use “alternative search” with all restrictions as at file, target functions value is about 75.3. But parameters are equal to bound. So, t-stats are extremely high.
When we use “mode_compute=4” without parameters restrictions, target functions value is about “41,59”. “54,46” is highest value of t-stat. When we use “alternative search” without parameters restrictions, target functions value is about “41,56”. But “10097” is highest value of t-stat. So, we have extremely high difference at t-stat even with situation when likelihood function values are close.
It’s really interesting to hear any comments or ideas about this situation.
PS File “res.txt” contains results of optimization of described cases.
- Attachments
-
- Res.txt
- (3.05 KiB) Downloaded 109 times
Sorry for my English. I'm from Russia.
- glucke
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 6:43 pm
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests