5
$\begingroup$

I tried to fit an AR(1) model and was examining the estimates of the model. I had a question on the output (ran in SAS - Proc ARIMA):

The residual auto-correlation up to lag 6 was non-significant (in other words - there is no auto-correlation); however, after lag 6 it is significant.

  • What does that imply?
  • Does that mean the model needs improvement?
  • Also, why would it be significant after lag 6?

Autocorrelation Check of Residuals  (Highlighted values are the auto-correlation 
    values and significant values are italicized)
[To Lag] [Chi-Square]  [DF] [Pr > ChiSq]    [Autocorrelations]  
  6          9.46       5     0.0922     ** 0.023 0.146  0.092 -0.01   0.089  0.127**    
 12         24.68      11    *0.0101*    ** 0.17  0.178 -0.095 -0.042 -0.056 -0.103**    
 18         34.42      17    *0.0074*    ** 0.126 0.105  0.05  -0.014 -0.151 -0.005**  
 24         38.86      23    *0.0206*    **-0.046 0.042  0.133 -0.008 -0.029 -0.017**
 30         51.21      29    *0.0067*    **-0.067 0.094  0.104  0.183  0.054  0.015**
$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Would those be a series of Ljung-Box tests on the residuals, each from lag 1 up to [To lag]? $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 30, 2013 at 14:43

2 Answers 2

3
$\begingroup$

The Ljung-Box statistic is not significant calculated over lags one to six lag six simply because you have no particularly large autocorrelations until lags seven & eight. Plot & examine the auto-correlation function of the residuals. There's some evidence for lack of fit, so perhaps you can come up with a better model: higher autocorrelations seem to repeat at intervals of seven without dropping off, suggesting seasonal differencing with a period of seven might be worth a try; possibly a seasonal moving average term. All the same, with about 150 observations your current model doesn't look awful.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

try fitting a seasonal ARIMA, with a seasonal difference of 6.

Your model has significant autocorrellations at lags in multiples of 6. It's just a guess on my end, but I'd think the seasonal ARIMA with difference of 6 would help.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Correlations at lags 6, 12, 18, 24, 30: 0.127, -0.103, -0.005, -0.017, & 0.015. Correlations at lags 7, 14, 21, 28: 0.17, 0.105, 0.133, 0.183. Which are bigger? $\endgroup$ Commented May 2, 2013 at 8:13
  • $\begingroup$ Oh, I see, I wasn't reading the results right. (never done arima in SAS, only R. results look different.) $\endgroup$
    – Faydey
    Commented May 2, 2013 at 18:24
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, too many stars all over the place. $\endgroup$ Commented May 2, 2013 at 21:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.