| Abstract: | The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. The analysis of volatility remains a preoccupation. In our veryfirst issue, "Practitioners' Corner" offered a brief retrospectiveon volatility modeling, surveying several strategies in thehistory of volatility modeling and locating the contributionsof the first issue within these broad themes. Of course, notall the highlights of this voluminous literature could be visitedor all noteworthy references cited. Nonetheless, we should havereferred to the venerable literature on mixture models introducedby the polymath Simon Newcomb in the late 19th century and subsequentlystudied by Karl Pearson. A neglected reminder was certainlysupplied by Lanne and Saikkonen (2003), who in this same firstissue of JFEC offered the wry understatement that the conditionalheteroskedasticity inherent in mixture autoregressive modelsmay not adequately capture the time-series properties of financialdata. The point is made again in the contribution to this issueby Markus Haas, Stefan Mittnik, and Marc . . . [Full Text of this Article] |
