Testing the impossible: Identifying exclusion restrictions
检验看似不可检验的条件:识别性排除限制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:摘要聚焦一般线性联立模型及工具变量限制,没有充分文本依据归入所列的具体应用细分。
检验看似不可检验的条件:识别性排除限制AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Method of moments estimation usually implies exploiting presumed uncorrelatedness of model disturbances and identifying instrumental variables. Here, utilizing non-orthogonality conditions is examined for linear multiple cross-section simultaneous regression models. Employing flexible bounds on the correlations between disturbances and regressors one avoids: (i) adoption of often incredible and unverifiable strictly zero correlation assumptions, and (ii) imprecise inference due to possibly weak or invalid external instruments. The suggested alternative form of inference is within constraints endogeneity robust; its asymptotic validity is proved and its accuracy in finite samples demonstrated by simulation. Next to offering an attractive alternative as such, it permits a sensitivity analysis of inference based on orthogonality conditions. Moreover, it yields statistical inference on the validity of exclusion restrictions regarding candidate external instruments, whereas these unavoidable restrictions were always supposed to be non-testable. The practical relevance is illustrated in a few applications borrowed from the textbook literature.