seminars:stat:03262015
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | |||
| seminars:stat:03262015 [2015/03/25 13:47] – qiao | seminars:stat:03262015 [2015/03/25 13:47] (current) – qiao | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | <WRAP centeralign>## | ||
| + | ~~META: | ||
| + | <WRAP 70% center> | ||
| + | ^ **DATE: | ||
| + | ^ **TIME: | ||
| + | ^ **LOCATION: | ||
| + | ^ **SPEAKER: | ||
| + | ^ **TITLE: | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | \\ | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP center box 80%> | ||
| + | <WRAP centeralign> | ||
| + | We propose an unbiased measure of ex-post price variation in the | ||
| + | frequency domain. It is periodogram-based. When intraday prices are | ||
| + | contaminated by market microstructure noise, the proposed estimator | ||
| + | behaves like a filter: it removes the noise by filtering out high | ||
| + | frequency periodograms. In other words, the proposed estimator converts | ||
| + | the high frequency data into low frequency periodograms. We show, via a | ||
| + | simulation study and an application to Microsoft transaction prices, that | ||
| + | the proposed estimator is insensitive to the choice of sampling frequency | ||
| + | and it is competitive with other existing noise-corrected volatility | ||
| + | measures. | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP center 80%> | ||
| + | **Speaker Biography**: | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP center 60%> | ||
| + | ^ Itinerary | ||
| + | | 09:30 - 10: | ||
| + | | 10:00 - 10: | ||
| + | | 10:30 - 11:15 |Meeting with Q.Q.Y. | | ||
| + | | 11:50 - 1:00|Lunch with Math faculty (Chenango Room) | | ||
| + | | 1:15 - 2: | ||
| + | | 2:30 - 3: | ||
| + | | 3:00 - 3: | ||
| + | | 3:30 - 5:30|OPEN| | ||
| + | | 5:30 - 7: | ||
| + | </ | ||
