0

This sentence is relative to my previous question. It is very important to understand it. However, I feel that the new sentence may do not mean to introduce a new idea.

Our modelling strategy is related to the work of Kim et al. (2013) and their idea of using mixtures of D-vines but tackles the problem of constructing a vine model from a different perspective. While their study is concerned with the use of mixtures of D-vines (yielding multivariate models of even higher flexibility), we construct C- and D-vines with mixture pair-copulas to minimize the possibility of misspecifying a vine model."

My question is: does use to minimize means that the new idea is aim to do something that may be not introduced in the last method?

In other words,

The authors mentioned that their work is related to the work of Kim. However, their model tackles the problem in a different way. And the aim of their idea is to reduce the mistake. My question is:

Does use ** we construct C- and D-vines with a mixture

4

What is the difference between the authors' strategy and that of Kim et al?

  • Where Kim et al use mixtures of D-Vines, the authors construct C- and D-vines with mixture pair-copulas.
    (I have no idea what those mean; presumably you and other readers do!)

Why do the authors employ this strategy?

  • To minimize the possibility of mis-specifying a vine model.

I would read this as the "new idea" being the new strategy, with the to minimize clause presented as an advantage which the new strategy offers over the old strategy.

3

We construct C-vines and D-vines with mixture pair-copulas in order to minimize the possibility of specifying a vine model incorrectly.

To minimize means to make as small as can be.

So, "In order to reduce, as much as possible, the chances of our making a mistake when we specify the vine model, we construct our C-vines and D-vines using mixture pair-copulas."

P.S. The while-clause establishes a contrast: While they did X, we do something different.

But the contrast seems to be that they (Kim et al) were using "mixtures of D-vines" that yielded multivariate models of even higher flexibility (more flexible than those of some other approach possibly mentioned earlier in the context? or more flexible than our new approach?) whereas we are using C-vines and D-vines with mixture pair-copulas in order to minimize the possibility of misspecifying the model.

It's not clear whether the current authors are saying that the approach of Kim et al resulted in significant misspecification; the new approach is different in that they are focusing specifically on that issue (perhaps sacrificing some "flexibility" in doing so?).

  • Thank you for your answer. I know the meaning of the word "minimize", however, I am asking about the meaning of the sentence. That is, the authors said that their model is relative to the Kim work, but using a different idea, which minimizes the mistake. So, does that means the minimization of the mistake is the main idea of their work which has not been introduced in the Kim work? – Maryam Jan 22 at 18:38

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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