Shared-Donor Inference for Fixed-Set Heterogeneity in Synthetic Difference-in-Differences
合成双重差分中固定目标集合异质性的共享供体推断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。
本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。
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:摘要明确研究合成控制和合成双重差分处理效应,并涉及供体及时间权重的联合误差,支持因果推断与面板数据分类。
合成双重差分中固定目标集合异质性的共享供体推断AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Empirical studies often estimate several synthetic-control or synthetic Difference-in-Differences effects from a common donor pool and then summarize their heterogeneity. Because the same donors enter several comparisons, the first-stage errors are jointly distributed and affect different targets differently. We characterize three regimes for linear fixed-set summaries: nonconcentration, root-rate donor exposure, and donornegligibility. We also show that removing shared-donor uncertainty from a quadratic summary requires the shared-donor covariance to vanish in every direction entering that summary. We take a valid joint first-order experiment for the effect vector as the input to the second stage. It yields simultaneous intervals for a prespecified linear family, a fixedgrid projection band, a centered effect-vector confidence region, image sets for total and explained heterogeneity and their ratio, and a sampling-center homogeneity test. For the hard-simplex SDID estimator, an operator-normalized numerical directional bootstrap re-estimates the donor and time weights in every draw. We use an exact critical-cone derivative to check the numerical approximation. In the Medicaid expansion application, omitting off-diagonal covariance understates uncertainty for the equal-jurisdiction mean but overstates it for a centered projection on the baseline uninsured rate. Persistent counterfactual mismatch is reported separately through deterministic sensitivity regions.
双重差分与合成控制的结合:双重稳健识别和估计
Difference-in-Differences (DiD) and Synthetic Control (SC) are widely used methods for causal inference in panel data, each with distinct strengths and limitations. We propose a novel method for short-panel causal inference that integrates the advantages of both approaches. Our method delivers a doubly robust identification strategy for the average treatment effect on the treated (ATT) under either of two non-nested assumptions: parallel trends or a group-level SC condition.…
哪项政策有效、在哪里有效?双重差分中的州级处理效应估计与推断
Policies with a common objective and implementation date may differ in details or context. We distinguish the aggregate average treatment effect on the treated (ATT) from sub-aggregate ATTs defined by implementation cohort, jurisdiction, period, or policy type. UN-DID and DID-INT, two DiD estimators that construct jurisdiction-by-time effects, estimate these ATTs under parallel-trends conditions matched to the aggregation. In CPS placebo-law simulations, randomization…
小样本与短面板:用贴近实际的数据评估政策评价方法
Methods for estimating causal effects in longitudinal, quasi-experimental settings are widely used in economics, public health, political science, and other fields. However, studies evaluating effects of health policies often rely on limited sample sizes, both in terms of study units and time periods analyzed. Synthetic difference-in-differences (SDiD) and the augmented synthetic control method (ASCM) are recently developed methods for evaluating the effects of policy…
通过时间安慰剂 Bootstrap 构造考虑偏差的合成控制置信区间
Synthetic control (SC) methods are among the most widely used tools for causal inference without randomization. The standard Gaussian confidence interval around the estimated effect is simple, fast, and reliably directional when the treatment signal is strong, so practitioners default to it for good reason. Most treated populations, however, are bottom-heavy in intensity, and for them the SC model's systematic bias rivals or exceeds the signal even under good pre-treatment…
三重稳健面板估计量
ABSTRACT This paper studies estimation of causal effects in a panel data setting. We introduce a new estimator, the Triply Robust Panel (TROP) estimator, that combines a flexible model for the potential outcomes based on a low‐rank factor structure on top of a two‐way‐fixed effect specification, with unit weights intended to upweight units similar to the treated units and time weights intended to upweight time periods close to the treated time periods. We study the…
基于双重差分的因果持续时间分析
In economic program evaluation, it is common to obtain panel data in which outcomes are indicators that an individual has reached an absorbing state. For example, they may indicate whether an individual has exited a period of unemployment, passed an exam, left a marriage, or had their parole revoked. The parallel trends assumption that underpins difference-in-differences generally fails in such settings. We suggest identifying conditions similar to those of…