Hello,

I have a large scale New Keynesian model where I computed the steady state by hand. While trying to debug the model and its parametrization I encountered three problems (Dynare 4.1.1, Matlab2009b 64bit,Win XP Professional):

[ol]

*]When using

`check;`

as the last command in my model-file after

[code]model;

…

end;

shocks;

…

end;

steady;[/code]

it tells me

[quote]There are 41 eigenvalue(s) larger than 1 in modulus

for 42 forward-looking variable(s)

The rank conditions ISN’T verified![/quote]

When putting

`stoch_simul(irf=20,nomoments,nocorr,order=1,nofunctions,noprint) y_H;`

after the check command, I get

[quote]There are 40 eigenvalue(s) larger than 1 in modulus

for 42 forward-looking variable(s)

The rank conditions ISN’T verified![/quote]

and when putting the second order approximation

`stoch_simul(irf=20,nomoments,nocorr,order=2,nofunctions,noprint) y_H;`

I get;

[quote]There are 42 eigenvalue(s) larger than 1 in modulus

for 42 forward-looking variable(s)

The rank condition is verified.[/quote]

How can it be that the output of the check command depends on the following commands invoked? Is there maybe a bug in the .mex64-files invoked by “check;” or “resolve.m”?/*:m]

*] For a somewhat different parametrization

```
check;
```

tells me that

[quote]There are 43 eigenvalue(s) larger than 1 in modulus

for 42 forward-looking variable(s)

The rank conditions ISN’T verified![/quote]

However,

`stoch_simul(irf=20,nomoments,nocorr,order=1,nofunctions,noprint) y_H;`

nevertheless computes the model solution and gives impulse responses. However, they look completely different than the ones on Matlab 2009a 32 bit machine. Moreover, the check command on the latter Matlab version says

[quote]There are 42 eigenvalue(s) larger than 1 in modulus

for 42 forward-looking variable(s)

The rank conditions is verified![/quote]

which would be consistent with the Blanchard-Kahn conditions being satisfied./*:m]

*]While the latter parametrization produces prima facie sensible output on the 64bit machine with

`stoch_simul(irf=20,nomoments,nocorr,order=1,nofunctions,noprint) y_H;`

the standard second order approximation

`stoch_simul(irf=20,nomoments,nocorr,order=2,nofunctions,noprint) y_H;`

fails as all impulse responses in oo_.irfs are NaN. Moreover,

`stoch_simul(irf=20,nomoments,nocorr,order=1,aim_solver,nofunctions,noprint) y_H;`

fails with

While there is most probably still a problem with the model parametrization, troubleshooting is complicated by the contradicting outputs. Which ones should I trust?/*:m][/ol]