Suppose we have a time series $\{y_t\}$ which we would like to model using an ARCH or GARCH model. That is we assume the time series can be written in the form $$y_t = \mu_t + \epsilon_t$$ where $\mu_t$ is the conditional mean at time $t$ which can be estimated by, for example, an ARMA model and $\epsilon_t \sim \mathcal{D}(0, \sigma_t^2)$ with $\mathcal{D}$ an arbitrary distribution.
The point of both the ARCH and GARCH models is to model the conditional variance $\sigma_t^2$. If we use an ARCH model then the idea is to model $\sigma_t^2$ by using an AR model. This would mean that, for an ARCH(1) model: $$\sigma_t = \alpha_0 + \alpha_1 y_{t-1}. \tag{1}$$ However other sources, such as on Wikipedia, state that we do not regress against the lagged $y_t$ terms but instead the lagged residuals $\epsilon_t$: $$\sigma_t = \alpha_0 + \alpha_1 \epsilon_{t-1} \tag{2}.$$ For either model the parameters can be found using OLS.
I have two questions about the above:
- Which is the correct ARCH model, (1) or (2)? In other words, should we regress on the previous time series values $y_t$ or the residuals $\epsilon_t$?
- The $\epsilon_t$ are innovations that are unobservable. I've read that in practice if we use model (2) then then we can estimate $\epsilon_{t-1}$ as $\hat{y}_{t-1} - y_{t-1}$. Is this true, and if so, what justifies this?