A comparison of alternative methods to construct confidence intervals for the estimate of a break date in linear regression models

This article considers constructing confidence intervals for the date of a structural break in linear regression models. Using extensive simulations, we compare the performance of various procedures in terms of exact coverage rates and lengths of the confidence intervals. These include the procedures of Bai (1997 Bai, J. (1997). Estimation of a change point in multiple regressions. Review of Economics and Statistics 79:551–563.) based on the asymptotic distribution under a shrinking shift framework, Elliott and Müller (2007 Elliott, G., Müller, U. (2007). Confidence sets for the date of a single break in linear time series regressions. Journal of Econometrics 141:1196–1218.) based on inverting a test locally invariant to the magnitude of break, Eo and Morley (2015 Eo, Y., Morley, J. (2015). Likelihood-ratio-based confidence sets for the timing of structural breaks. Quantitative Economics 6:463–497.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]) based on inverting a likelihood ratio test, and various bootstrap procedures. On the basis of achieving an exact coverage rate that is closest to the nominal level, Elliott and Müller's (2007 Elliott, G., Müller, U. (2007). Confidence sets for the date of a single break in linear time series regressions. Journal of Econometrics 141:1196–1218.) approach is by far the best one. However, this comes with a very high cost in terms of the length of the confidence intervals. When the errors are serially correlated and dealing with a change in intercept or a change in the coefficient of a stationary regressor with a high signal-to-noise ratio, the length of the confidence interval increases and approaches the whole sample as the magnitude of the change increases. The same problem occurs in models with a lagged dependent variable, a common case in practice. This drawback is not present for the other methods, which have similar properties. Theoretical results are provided to explain the drawbacks of Elliott and Müller's (2007 Elliott, G., Müller, U. (2007). Confidence sets for the date of a single break in linear time series regressions. Journal of Econometrics 141:1196–1218.) method

Belief revision in the propositional closure of a qualitative algebra

Belief revision is an operation that aims at modifying old be-liefs so that they become consistent with new ones. The issue of belief revision has been studied in various formalisms, in particular, in qualitative algebras (QAs) in which the result is a disjunction of belief bases that is not necessarily repre-sentable in a QA. This motivates the study of belief revision in formalisms extending QAs, namely, their propositional clo-sures: in such a closure, the result of belief revision belongs to the formalism. Moreover, this makes it possible to define a contraction operator thanks to the Harper identity. Belief revision in the propositional closure of QAs is studied, an al-gorithm for a family of revision operators is designed, and an open-source implementation is made freely available on the web

A comparison of alternative methods to construct confidence intervals for the estimate of a break date in linear regression models

This article considers constructing confidence intervals for the date of a structural break in linear regression models. Using extensive simulations, we compare the performance of various procedures in terms of exact coverage rates and lengths of the confidence intervals. These include the procedures of Bai (1997 Bai, J. (1997). Estimation of a change point in multiple regressions. Review of Economics and Statistics 79:551–563.) based on the asymptotic distribution under a shrinking shift framework, Elliott and Müller (2007 Elliott, G., Müller, U. (2007). Confidence sets for the date of a single break in linear time series regressions. Journal of Econometrics 141:1196–1218.) based on inverting a test locally invariant to the magnitude of break, Eo and Morley (2015 Eo, Y., Morley, J. (2015). Likelihood-ratio-based confidence sets for the timing of structural breaks. Quantitative Economics 6:463–497.) based on inverting a likelihood ratio test, and various bootstrap procedures. On the basis of achieving an exact coverage rate that is closest to the nominal level, Elliott and Müller's (2007 Elliott, G., Müller, U. (2007). Confidence sets for the date of a single break in linear time series regressions. Journal of Econometrics 141:1196–1218.) approach is by far the best one. However, this comes with a very high cost in terms of the length of the confidence intervals. When the errors are serially correlated and dealing with a change in intercept or a change in the coefficient of a stationary regressor with a high signal-to-noise ratio, the length of the confidence interval increases and approaches the whole sample as the magnitude of the change increases. The same problem occurs in models with a lagged dependent variable, a common case in practice. This drawback is not present for the other methods, which have similar properties. Theoretical results are provided to explain the drawbacks of Elliott and Müller's (2007 Elliott, G., Müller, U. (2007). Confidence sets for the date of a single break in linear time series regressions. Journal of Econometrics 141:1196–1218 method

Long-term complications of continent catheterizable channels: a problem for transitional urologists.

A majority of the transitional urology patient population have neurogenic bladder and many of these patients have undergone creation of continent catheterizable channels (CCCs) to facilitate bladder emptying. Transitional urologists will be faced with revision of these channels due to a variety of possible complications. We performed a comprehensive literature review to the data regarding the incidence, timing, and predisposing factors that lead to complications of CCCs as well as surgical revision techniques and their outcomes. Long-term channel complications and related revisions are common (25-30%) and likely underestimated. While many predictors for revision have been posited, the only predictor that has been significant in robust multivariable analysis is channel type, with appendicovesicostomies having a lower chance of requiring revision compared to Monti channels. Channels created in adults have high likelihood of requiring revision, even within a relatively short follow-up period. We review techniques for management of channel complications and their outcomes. As patients with congenital urologic conditions requiring CCCs are gaining longer lifespans, transitional urologists will be faced with revision and/or replacement of these channels. While some of these patients may require supravesical diversion in the future, data show that revision is feasible with good outcomes. Longer-term follow-up data is needed to understand the life-span and best practices of new CCCs created among the transitional population