I've been working with a SARIMAX model for forecasting and found myself struggling to accurately interpret its long-term forecasts. To better understand the underlying mechanics and perhaps pinpoint where my confusion originates, I decided to revisit the fundamentals and examine the behavior of a simpler AR(1) model with a constant term.
I generate data according to the following AR(1) process:
data[i] = c + phi * data[i-1] + eps[i]
where c
is a constant, phi
is the autoregressive coefficient, and eps[i]
is a white noise error term. After generating the data, I first regress the generated series on just a constant and then with its lagged value as an explanatory variable. When regressing on just the constant, the estimate I get is very close to c
, as expected. However, things get tricky when I add the lagged data as an explanatory variable.
Despite the mean of the generated data being consistent with the theoretical expectation of $c/(1−phi)$, the constant estimate from regressing $X$ on both a constant and $X_{t-1}$ significantly deviates from the original c
used in the data generation process. The coefficient for $X_{t-1}$ seems reasonable, but the constant term is different from c
in the DGP.
I'm puzzled by this discrepancy. I initially thought my data generation process (DGP) might be incorrect, but the mean of the data aligns with theoretical expectations, suggesting the DGP is correct.
Questions:
Is my expectation to approximate
c
from my DGP when including the lagged variable as an explanatory variable incorrect?Are there any common pitfalls or considerations in estimating AR(1) model parameters that I might be overlooking?
Any insights or suggestions on what might be causing these unexpected estimates and how to address them would be greatly appreciated!