跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

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。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要联合建模离散商店选择与计数面板,并依据随机效用模型开展福利反事实,直接涉及离散选择、面板数据和结构估计。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Martin Burda
Matthew Harding
Jerry Hausman

离散选择的泊松混合模型

研究问题
如何在同一随机效用框架中联合解释消费者的商店选择与到访次数,并刻画价格、距离及消费者异质性对行为和福利的作用?
方法与思路
作者令泊松强度由潜在效用最大化内生决定,以灵活半参数分布描述随机系数,并通过矩序列、累积量表示和递归算法计算似然。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称模型统一选择与计数,推导数值收敛界并实现贝叶斯估计;家庭面板应用分析购物行为,并计算价格上调情景下的补偿变差。
阅读关注点
应核对效用到泊松强度的映射、随机系数分布的识别、矩展开的误差控制,以及福利反事实如何处理商店选择和出行频率的变化。
阅读边界
解读限于所给出版社摘要;具体效用形式、识别条件和福利数值未说明,价格上调百分比是反事实设定,不能当作实际福利损失。

原文摘要

In this paper, we introduce a new Poisson mixture model for count panel data where the underlying Poisson process intensity is determined endogenously by consumer latent utility maximization over a set of choice alternatives. This formulation accommodates the choice and count in a single random utility framework with desirable theoretical properties. Individual heterogeneity is introduced through a random coefficient scheme with a flexible semiparametric distribution. We deal with the analytical intractability of the resulting mixture by recasting the model as an embedding of infinite sequences of scaled moments of the mixing distribution, and newly derive their cumulant representations along with bounds on their rate of numerical convergence. We further develop an efficient recursive algorithm for fast evaluation of the model likelihood within a Bayesian Gibbs sampling scheme. We apply our model to a recent household panel of supermarket visit counts. We estimate the nonparametric density of three key variables of interest–price, driving distance, and their interaction–while controlling for a range of consumer demographic characteristics. We use this econometric framework to assess the opportunity cost of time and analyze the interaction between store choice, trip frequency, search intensity, and household and store characteristics. We also conduct a counterfactual welfare experiment and compute the compensating variation for a 10%–30% increase in Walmart prices.

笔记与分组