Controlling the bias of robust small-area estimators
控制稳健小区域估计量的偏差AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要关注调查统计中的小区域均值与稳健偏差修正,未明确对应所列经济计量细分领域。
控制稳健小区域估计量的偏差AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Sinha & Rao (2009) proposed estimation procedures designed for small-area means, based on robustified maximum likelihood estimators and robust empirical best linear unbiased predictors. Their methods are of the plug-in type and may be biased. Bias-corrected estimators have been proposed by Chambers et al. (2013). Here, we investigate two new approaches: one relying on the work of Chambers (1986), and the second using the concept of conditional bias to measure the influence of units in the population. These two classes of estimators also include correction terms for the bias but are both fully bias-corrected, in the sense that the corrections account for the potential impact of the other domains on the small area of interest. Monte Carlo simulations suggest that the Sinha–Rao method and the bias-adjusted estimator of Chambers et al. (2013) may exhibit a large bias, while the new procedures often offer lower bias and mean squared error. A parametric bootstrap procedure is considered for constructing confidence intervals.