Junction conditions in General Relativity with spin sources

The junction conditions for General Relativity in the presence of domain walls with intrinsic spin are derived in three and higher dimensions. A stress tensor and a spin current can be defined just by requiring the existence of a well defined volume element instead of an induced metric, so as to allow for generic torsion sources. In general, when the torsion is localized on the domain wall, it is necessary to relax the continuity of the tangential components of the vielbein. In fact it is found that the spin current is proportional to the jump in the vielbein and the stress-energy tensor is proportional to the jump in the spin connection. The consistency of the junction conditions implies a constraint between the direction of flow of energy and the orientation of the spin. As an application, we derive the circularly symmetric solutions for both the rotating string with tension and the spinning dust string in three dimensions. The rotating string with tension generates a rotating truncated cone outside and a flat space-time with inevitable frame dragging inside. In the case of a string made of spinning dust, in opposition to the previous case no frame dragging is present inside, so that in this sense, the dragging effect can be "shielded" by considering spinning instead of rotating sources. Both solutions are consistently lifted as cylinders in the four-dimensional case.Comment: 24 pages, no figures, CECS style. References added and misprints corrected. Published Versio

Inference about Non-Identified SVARs

We propose a method for conducting inference on impulse responses in structural vector autoregressions (SVARs) when the impulse response is not point identified because the number of equality restrictions one can credibly impose is not sufficient for point identification and/or one imposes sign restrictions. We proceed in three steps. We first define the object of interest as the identified set for a given impulse response at a given horizon and discuss how inference is simple when the identified set is convex, as one can limit attention to the set’s upper and lower bounds. We then provide easily verifiable conditions on the type of equality and sign restrictions that guarantee convexity. These cover most cases of practical interest, with exceptions including sign restrictions on multiple shocks and equality restrictions that make the impulse response locally, but not globally, identified. Second, we show how to conduct inference on the identified set. We adopt a robust Bayes approach that considers the class of all possible priors for the non-identified aspects of the model and delivers a class of associated posteriors. We summarize the posterior class by reporting the “posterior mean bounds”, which can be interpreted as an estimator of the identified set. We also consider a “robustified credible region” which is a measure of the posterior uncertainty about the identified set. The two intervals can be obtained using a computationally convenient numerical procedure. Third, we show that the posterior bounds converge asymptotically to the identified set if the set is convex. If the identified set is not convex, our posterior bounds can be interpreted as an estimator of the convex hull of the identified set. Finally, a useful diagnostic tool delivered by our procedure is the posterior belief about the plausibility of the imposed identifying restrictions

Robust Bayesian Inference for Set-Identified Models

This paper reconciles the asymptotic disagreement between Bayesian and frequentist inference in set‐identified models by adopting a multiple‐prior (robust) Bayesian approach. We propose new tools for Bayesian inference in set‐identified models and show that they have a well‐defined posterior interpretation in finite samples and are asymptotically valid from the frequentist perspective. The main idea is to construct a prior class that removes the source of the disagreement: the need to specify an unrevisable prior for the structural parameter given the reduced‐form parameter. The corresponding class of posteriors can be summarized by reporting the ‘posterior lower and upper probabilities’ of a given event and/or the ‘set of posterior means’ and the associated ‘robust credible region’. We show that the set of posterior means is a consistent estimator of the true identified set and the robust credible region has the correct frequentist asymptotic coverage for the true identified set if it is convex. Otherwise, the method provides posterior inference about the convex hull of the identified set. For impulse‐response analysis in set‐identified Structural Vector Autoregressions, the new tools can be used to overcome or quantify the sensitivity of standard Bayesian inference to the choice of an unrevisable prior

Number and Amplitude of Limit Cycles emerging from {\it Topologically Equivalent} Perturbed Centers

We consider three examples of weekly perturbed centers which do not have {\it geometrical equivalence}: a linear center, a degenerate center and a non-hamiltonian center. In each case the number and amplitude of the limit cycles emerging from the period annulus are calculated following the same strategy: we reduce of all of them to locally equivalent perturbed integrable systems of the form: $dH(x,y)+\epsilon(f(x,y)dy-g(x,y)dx)=0$, with $H(x,y)={1/2}(x^2+y^2)$. This reduction allows us to find the Melnikov function, $M(h)=\int_{H=h}fdy-gdx$, associated to each particular problem. We obtain the information on the bifurcation curves of the limit cycles by solving explicitly the equation $M(h)=0$ in each case.Comment: 17 pages, 0 figure

Uncertain identification

Uncertainty about the choice of identifying assumptions is common in causal studies, but is often ignored in empirical practice. This paper considers uncertainty over models that impose different identifying assumptions, which can lead to a mix of point- and set- identified models. We propose performing inference in the presence of such uncertainty by generalizing Bayesian model averaging. The method considers multiple posteriors for the set-identified models and combines them with a single posterior for models that are either point-identified or that impose non-dogmatic assumptions. The output is a set of posteriors (post-averaging ambiguous belief ), which can be summarized by reporting the set of posterior means and the associated credible region. We clarify when the prior model probabilities are updated and characterize the asymptotic behavior of the posterior model probabilities. The method provides a formal framework for conducting sensitivity analysis of empirical findings to the choice of identifying assumptions. For example, we find that in a standard monetary model one would need to attach a prior probability greater than 0.28 to the validity of the assumption that prices do not react contemporaneously to a monetary policy shock, in order to obtain a negative response of output to the shock

Uncertain identification

Uncertainty about the choice of identifying assumptions is common in causal studies, but is often ignored in empirical practice. This paper considers uncertainty over models that impose different identifying assumptions, which, in general, leads to a mix of point- and set-identified models. We propose performing inference in the presence of such uncertainty by generalizing Bayesian model averaging. The method considers multiple posteriors for the set-identified models and combines them with a single posterior for models that are either point-identified or that impose non-dogmatic assumptions. The output is a set of posteriors (post-averaging ambiguous belief) that are mixtures of the single posterior and any element of the class of multiple posteriors, with weights equal to the posterior model probabilities. We suggest reporting the range of posterior means and the associated credible region in practice, and provide a simple algorithm to compute them. We establish that the prior model probabilities are updated when the models are "distinguishable" and/or they specify different priors for reduced-form parameters, and characterize the asymptotic behavior of the posterior model probabilities. The method provides a formal framework for conducting sensitivity analysis of empirical findings to the choice of identifying assumptions. In a standard monetary model, for example, we show that, in order to support a negative response of output to a contractionary monetary policy shock, one would need to attach a prior probability greater than 0.32 to the validity of the assumption that prices do not react contemporaneously to such a shock. The method is general and allows for dogmatic and non-dogmatic identifying assumptions, multiple point-identified models, multiple set-identified models, and nested or non-nested models

A SOA-Based Platform to Support Clinical Data Sharing

The eSource Data Interchange Group, part of the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium, proposed five scenarios to guide stakeholders in the development of solutions for the capture of eSource data. The fifth scenario was subdivided into four tiers to adapt the functionality of electronic health records to support clinical research. In order to develop a system belonging to the \u201cInteroperable\u201d Tier, the authors decided to adopt the service-oriented architecture paradigm to support technical interoperability, Health Level Seven Version 3 messages combined with LOINC (Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes) vocabulary to ensure semantic interoperability, and Healthcare Services Specification Project standards to provide process interoperability. The developed architecture enhances the integration between patient-care practice and medical research, allowing clinical data sharing between two hospital information systems and four clinical data management systems/clinical registries. The core is formed by a set of standardized cloud services connected through standardized interfaces, involving client applications. The system was approved by a medical staff, since it reduces the workload for the management of clinical trials. Although this architecture can realize the \u201cInteroperable\u201d Tier, the current solution actually covers the \u201cConnected\u201d Tier, due to local hospital policy restrictions

Incentive-driven inattention

“Rational inattention” is becoming increasingly prominent in economic modeling, but there is little empirical evidence for its central premise-that the choice of attention results from a cost-benefit optimization. Observational data typically do not allow researchers to infer attention choices from observables. We fill this gap in the literature by exploiting a unique dataset of professional forecasters who update their inflation forecasts at days of their choice. In the data we observe how many forecasters update (extensive margin of updating), the magnitude of the update (intensive margin), and the objective of optimization (forecast accuracy). There are also “shifters” in incentives: A contest that increases the benefit of accurate forecasting, and the release of official data that reduces the cost of processing information. These features allow us to link observables to attention and incentive parameters. We structurally estimate a model where the decision to update and the magnitude of the update are endogenous and the latter is the outcome of a rational inattention optimization. The empirical findings provide support for the key implication of rational inattention that information-processing efforts react to changing incentives. Counterfactuals reveal that accuracy is maximized if the contest date coincides with the release of information, aligning higher benefits with lower costs of attention