Dear Johannes and Dynare Community,

I am a little puzzled by the variance decomposition generated by the Smets & Wouters 2007 mod file provided on Johannes’ github page here, and the results exhibited in the original paper. For example, the conditional variance decomposition at 10 quarters generated by the mod file for inflation and output are:

```
ea eb eg eqs em epinf ew
pinf 4.83 0.75 0.77 1.41 8.62 42.58 41.05
y 39.07 7.77 10.75 14.14 8.68 10.54 9.05
```

But when I look at Figure 1 of Smets & Wouters 2007 (viewable here), the relative contributions look quite different. For example, the contribution of productivity shocks at 10 quarters are about 32% for GDP in the image compared to 39% in the table above. Similarly, price markup shocks contribute about 42% in the table above, but more like 32% in the image.

Am I generating the Conditional Variance Decomposition incorrectly? Or am I misunderstanding what S&W 2007 are showing in this image?

To be clear, I’m generating the variance decomposition by first running the estimation command with the mode taken from the mode_file and mh_repli=0 (so basically the estimation command is run unchanged), and then immediately specifying stoch_simul with the conditional_variance_decomposition=10 option:

```
estimation(optim=('MaxIter',200),datafile=usmodel_data,mode_file=usmodel_shock_decomp_mode,mode_compute=0,first_obs=1, presample=4,lik_init=2,prefilter=0,mh_replic=0,mh_nblocks=2,mh_jscale=0.20,mh_drop=0.2, nograph, nodiagnostic, tex);
stoch_simul(hp_filter = 1600, order = 1, irf=25, relative_irf, nograph, conditional_variance_decomposition=10) pinf y ;
```

Thank you in advance for the help!