The Confidence Interval Method for Selecting Valid Instrumental Variables
选择有效工具变量的置信区间方法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:摘要明确以工具变量识别暴露对结果的因果效应,并处理违反排除条件的候选工具。
选择有效工具变量的置信区间方法AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Abstract We propose a new method, the confidence interval (CI) method, to select valid instruments from a larger set of potential instruments for instrumental variable (IV) estimation of the causal effect of an exposure on an outcome. Invalid instruments are such that they fail the exclusion conditions and enter the model as explanatory variables. The CI method is based on the CIs of the per instrument causal effects estimates and selects the largest group with all CIs overlapping with each other as the set of valid instruments. Under a plurality rule, we show that the resulting standard IV, or two-stage least squares (2SLS) estimator has oracle properties. This result is the same as for the hard thresholding with voting (HT) method of Guo et al. (Journal of the Royal Statistical Society : Series B, 2018, 80, 793–815). Unlike the HT method, the number of instruments selected as valid by the CI method is guaranteed to be monotonically decreasing for decreasing values of the tuning parameter. For the CI method, we can therefore use a downward testing procedure based on the Sargan (Econometrica, 1958, 26, 393–415) test for overidentifying restrictions and a main advantage of the CI downward testing method is that it selects the model with the largest number of instruments selected as valid that passes the Sargan test.