Skip to main content
Log in

How to test that a given process is an Ornstein–Uhlenbeck process

  • Published:
Statistical Inference for Stochastic Processes Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We show asymptotic distributions of the residual process in Ornstein–Uhlenbeck model, when the model is true. These distributions are of Brownian motion and of Brownian bridge, depending on whether we estimate one parameter or two. This leads to seemingly simple asymptotic theory of goodness of fit tests based on this process. However, next we show that the residual process would lead to a deficient testing procedures, unless a transformed form of it is introduced. The transformed process is introduced and their role is explained through connection with what is known for the so called chimeric alternatives in testing problems for samples.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Scanning through the database MathSciNet with key-word ”Ornstein–Uhlenbeck process” returned first 18 pages, with 20 titles per page, all still dated after year 2000.

  2. In Greek mythology Chimera is a creature which constantly changes, appears and disappears.

References

  • Abdelrazeq I, Ivanoff BG, Kulik R (2014) Model verification for Lévy-driven Ornstein–Uhlenbeck processes. Electron J Stat 8:1029–1062

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ait-Sahalia Y, Fan J, Peng H (2009) Nonparametric transition-based tests for jump diffusions. J Am Stat Assoc 104:1102–116

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Amari S (1985) Differential geometric theory of statistics. In: Lecture notes in statistics, vol 28. Springer, Heidelberg

  • Barczy M, Pap G (2010) Asymptotic behaviour of maximum likelihood estimator for time inhomogeneous diffusion processes. J Stat Plan Inference 6:1576–1593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basawa IV, Scott DJ (1983) Asymptotically optimal inference for non-ergodic models, Lecture notes in statistics, vol 17. Springer, Heidelberg

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dachian S, Kutoyants YA (2008) On the goodness-of-fit testing for some continuous time processes. In: Vonta F et al (eds) Statistical models and methods for biomedical and technical systems. Birkhauser, Boston, pp 385–403

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Davydov Yu (2001) Remarks on estimation problem for stationary processes in continuous time. Stat Inference Stoch Process 4:1–15

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Feigin Paul D (1976) Maximum likelihood estimation for continuous-time stochastic process. Adv Appl Probab 8:712–736

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood P, Shiryaev AN (1985) Contiguity and statistical inference. Gordon and Breach, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen A (1995) Principal component decomposition for non-parametric tests. Probab Theory Relat Fields 101:193–209

  • Hu Y, Nualart D (2009) Parameter estimation for fractional Ornstein–Uhlenbeck processes. arXiv:0901.4925v1

  • Jiang H (2011) The precise asymptotic behavior of parameter estimators in Ornstein–Uhlenbeck process. J Math Anal Appl 382:367–382

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Khmaladze EV (1981) Martingale approach to nonparametric goodness of fit tests. Theory Probab Appl XXVI:240–258

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Khmaladze EV (1993) Goodness of fit problem and scanning innovation martingales. Ann Stat 21:798–830

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Khmaladze EV (1998) Goodness of fit tests for “chimeric” alternatives. Stat Neerl 51:90–121

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kim YT, Park HS (2017) Optimal Berry-Esseen bound for an estimator of parameter in the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck process (English summary). J Korean Stat Soc 46:413–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleptsina ML, Le Breton A (2002) Statistical analysis of the fractional Ornstein–Uhlenbeck type process. Stat Inference Stoch Process 5:229–248

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kleptsyna ML, Kutoyants YuA (2014) On asymptotically distribution-free tests with parametric hypothesis for ergodic diffusion processes. Stat Inference Stoch Process 17:295–319

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kukush A, Mishura Yu, Ralchenko K (2017) Hypothesis testing of the drift parameter sign for fractional Ornstein–Uhlenbeck process. Electron J Stat 11:385–400

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kutoyants YA (2004) Statistical inference for ergodic diffusion processes, springer series in statistics

  • Kutoyants YA (2015) On ADF goodness-of-fit tests for perturbed dynamical systems. Bernoulli 21:2430–2456

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Wee I-S (2008) Residual empirical process for diffusion process. J Korean Math Soc 45(3):683–693

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lin’kov YN (1993) Asymptotic statistical methods for stochastic processes. Naukova Dumka (Translations of Mathematical Monographs, Issue 196). American Mathematical Society, Providence, 2001

  • Liptser RS, Shiryaev AN (1980) Functional central limit theorem for semimartingales. Theory Probab Appl XXV:683–703

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Liptser RS, Shiryaev AN (2001) Statistics of random processes, vol 2. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Martynov GV (1975) Omega-square test. Nauka, Moscow (In Russian)

  • Masuda H, Negri I, Nishiyama Y (2010) Goodness-of-fit test for ergodic diffusion by discrete-time observations: an innovation martingale approach. J Nonparametr Stat 23:237–254

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Negri I, Nishiyama Y (2009) Goodness of fit test for ergodic diffusion process. Ann. Ins. Stat. Math 61:919–928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pracasa Rao BLS (1999) Statistical inference for diffusion type process. Arnold, Hodder Headline Group, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Szimayer A, Maller R (2004) Testing for mean reversion in processes of Ornstein–Uhlenbeck type. Stat Inference Stoch Process 7:95–113

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I had discussions around Lemmas 1 and 2, with some of my colleagues and friends, most notably, with P. Greenwood and O. Purtukhia. The comments of the referee have also been very useful. I thank all of them for this help.

Funding

Funding was provided by Marsden Fund (Grant No. VUW13).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Estate V. Khmaladze.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khmaladze, E.V. How to test that a given process is an Ornstein–Uhlenbeck process. Stat Inference Stoch Process 24, 405–419 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11203-020-09233-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11203-020-09233-1

Keywords

Navigation