This paper examines the problem of testing and confidence set construction for one-dimensional functions of the coefficients in autoregressive (AR(p)) models with potentially persistent time series. The primary example concerns inference on impulse responses. A new asymptotic framework is suggested and some new theoretical properties of known procedures are demonstrated. I show that the likelihood ratio (LR) and LR± statistics for a linear hypothesis in an AR(p) can be uniformly approximated by a weighted average of local-to-unity and normal distributions. The corresponding weights depend on the weight placed on the largest root in the null hypothesis. The suggested approximation is uniform over the set of all linear hypotheses. The same family of distributions approximates the LR and LR± statistics for tests about impulse responses, and the approximation is uniform over the horizon of the impulse response. I establish the size properties of tests about impulse responses proposed by Inoue and Kilian (2002) and Gospodinov (2004), and theoretically explain some of the empirical findings of Pesavento and Rossi (2007). An adaptation of the grid bootstrap for impulse response functions is suggested and its properties are examined.

The purpose of this paper is to provide theoretical justification for some existing methods for constructing confidence intervals for the sum of coefficients in autoregressive models. We show that the methods of Stock (1991), Andrews (1993), and Hansen (1999) provide asymptotically valid confidence intervals, whereas the subsampling method of Romano and Wolf (2001) does not. In addition, we generalize the three valid methods to a larger class of statistics. We also clarify the difference between uniform and pointwise asymptotic approximations, and show that a pointwise convergence of coverage probabilities for all values of the parameter does not guarantee the validity of the confidence set.

This paper studies optimal decision rules, including estimators and tests, for weakly identified GMM models. We derive the limit experiment for weakly identified GMM, and propose a theoretically‐motivated class of priors which give rise to quasi‐Bayes decision rules as a limiting case. Together with results in the previous literature, this establishes desirable properties for the quasi‐Bayes approach regardless of model identification status, and we recommend quasi‐Bayes for settings where identification is a concern. We further propose weighted average power‐optimal identification‐robust frequentist tests and confidence sets, and prove a Bernstein‐von Mises‐type result for the quasi‐Bayes posterior under weak identification.

Conventional tests for composite hypotheses in minimum distance models can be unreliable when the relationship between the structural and reduced‐form parameters is highly nonlinear. Such nonlinearity may arise for a variety of reasons, including weak identification. In this note, we begin by studying the problem of testing a “curved null” in a finite‐sample Gaussian model. Using the curvature of the model, we develop new finite‐sample bounds on the distribution of minimum‐distance statistics. These bounds allow us to construct tests for composite hypotheses which are uniformly asymptotically valid over a large class of data generating processes and structural models.

This paper shows that the problem of testing hypotheses in moment condition models without any assumptions about identification may be considered as a problem of testing with an infinite‐dimensional nuisance parameter. We introduce a sufficient statistic for this nuisance parameter in a Gaussian problem and propose conditional tests. These conditional tests have uniformly correct asymptotic size for a large class of models and test statistics. We apply our approach to construct tests based on quasi‐likelihood ratio statistics, which we show are efficient in strongly identified models and perform well relative to existing alternatives in two examples.

In this paper we connect the discrepancy between two estimates of Fisher information, one based on the quadratic variation of the score and the other based on the negative Hessian of the log-likelihood, to weak identification. Classical asymptotic approximations assume that these two estimates are asymptotically equivalent, but we show that this equivalence fails in many weakly identified models, which can distort the behavior of the MLE. Using a stylized DSGE model we show that the discrepancy between information estimates is large when identification is weak.

We develop a concept of weak identification in linear instrumental variable models in which the number of instruments can grow at the same rate or slower than the sample size. We propose a jackknifed version of the classical weak identification-robust Anderson–Rubin (AR) test statistic. Large-sample inference based on the jackknifed AR is valid under heteroscedasticity and weak identification. The feasible version of this statistic uses a novel variance estimator. The test has uniformly correct size and good power properties. We also develop a pre-test for weak identification that is related to the size property of a Wald test based on the Jackknife Instrumental Variable Estimator. This new pre-test is valid under heteroscedasticity and with many instruments.