Part 3: providing feedback

[mandyxmg]

Hi @mantihuang,

It's a nice submission! The research work is informative and comprehensive, and it includes the discussion and investigation of the empirical issue in the Australian macroeconomy. The changes I made in your repository are as follows:

• I proposed a research work title to replace the existing one "Research Proposal", so it can make more sense of what the research work is relevant to. Feel free to change to another one that you think is more appropriate.

• I made some changes in the hierarchical structure of the headings so that the structure of the work would be more tidy and concise. A notable change is that I combined the research work's motivation, aiming, and questions to answer in one paragraph instead of three.

• I re-write the ADF test to implement 4 lags rather than 1 lag in the lag selection criteria, given your dataset are quarterly data. In addition, instead of reporting the test statistics and critical value to let readers judge if null hypothesis is needed to reject, especially ADF test distribution is non-normal, it's not straightforward to compare and conclude, I thus re-write to report the P value, which can provide some convenience.

• I updated the subscript of the Gibbs sampler for the kappa to improve the understanding of how the algorithm works.

• I put the code that's not being used in a separate chunk so they won't display with the used codes.

Further suggestions:

• It would be good to clean up the code a bit to delete the unused ones and make the equal sign "<-" "=" consistent in the final report. I noted the two are interchangeably used for now.

Overall, nice work, nice efforts. Good luck with the final submission :)

Best,

@mandyxmg

[mantihuang]

Hi @mandyxmg ,

Thanks for your feedback. I have incorporated the ADF with four lag.

Thanks