Empirical Decomposition of the IV-OLS Gap with Heterogeneous and Nonlinear Effects
异质与非线性效应下 IV 与 OLS 差距的经验分解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:摘要围绕异质非线性因果效应、工具变量及内生性偏差解释,直接属于因果推断。
异质与非线性效应下 IV 与 OLS 差距的经验分解AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
This study proposes an econometric framework to interpret and empirically decompose the difference between IV and OLS estimates given by a linear regression model when the true causal effects of the treatment are nonlinear in treatment levels and heterogeneous across covariates. I show that the IV-OLS coefficient gap consists of three estimable components: the difference in weights on the covariates, the difference in weights on the treatment levels, and the difference in identified marginal effects that arises from endogeneity bias. Applications of this framework to return-to-schooling estimates demonstrate the empirical relevance of this distinction in properly interpreting the IV-OLS gap.
Two frequent approaches for identifying structural VARs are external instruments, which carry economic content but are often weak, and non-Gaussianity of the shocks, which provides statistical identification but carries no economic meaning. We combine the two strategies in a single generalized method of moments framework. This hybrid approach point-identifies the target shocks while also identifying the non-target shocks up to sign and ordering. Under suitable rank…
IV-LASSO 的工具变量字典与惩罚选择
Estimating the first stage of an instrumental variables (IV) model with the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) requires choosing a dictionary of technical instruments and a penalty level. First-order asymptotic theory offers no guidance on these choices, as any consistent implementation yields a structural parameter estimator with the same limiting distribution. In finite samples, however, these choices can have a substantial impact on the resulting…
嵌套工具变量分析:转换者平均处理效应及可推广性
Instrumental variables (IVs) are widely used to estimate causal effects from non-randomized data. A canonical example is a randomized trial with noncompliance, in which the randomized treatment assignment serves as an IV for the non-ignorable treatment received. Under a monotonicity assumption, a valid IV nonparametrically identifies the average treatment effect among a latent complier subgroup, whose generalizability is often under debate. In many studies, there exist…
借助知识迁移增强代表性不足子群体的工具变量分析
Instrumental variable (IV) analysis in underrepresented target populations suffers from low statistical efficiency and weak IV bias due to limited sample size. Leveraging external knowledge from a source population with larger samples offers an appealing solution to this problem. We propose in this paper the KNowledge-powered IV Estimator for underrepresented Subpopulations (KNIVES), a framework that enhances the IV analysis for underrepresented subpopulations by…
Instrumental variable (IV) methods mitigate bias from unobserved confounding in observational causal inference but rely on the availability of a valid instrument, which can often be difficult or infeasible to identify in practice. In this paper, we propose a representation learning approach that constructs instrumental representations from observed covariates, which could enable IV-based estimation even in the absence of an explicit instrument. Our model (ZNet) achieves this…
全正编码下的 INSIDE 假设:解释与部分经验评估
Mendelian randomisation (MR) implemented through instrumental variable (IV) analysis is a popular strategy for strengthening causal inference in observational studies. A key assumption for several MR estimators, including MR-Egger regression, is the INstrument Strength Independent of Direct Effect (INSIDE) assumption. However, there is no established empirical test for assessing the plausibility of this assumption. Moreover, INSIDE depends on how genetic variants are coded…