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:摘要明确以未观测混杂下的处理效应为目标,讨论工具变量有效性、过度识别检验与敏感性分析,直接对应因果推断。

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
Dylan S Small

具有过度识别约束的工具变量回归敏感性分析

研究问题
当多个候选工具变量的有效性存在疑问,而过度识别检验对某些偏离缺乏检验力时,如何评估因果推断的敏感性?
方法与思路
作者提出带过度识别约束的工具变量回归敏感性分析,利用检验信息,并通过可与领域专家讨论的参数描述工具失效。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称该方法考察检验低检验力方向上的有效性违背,从而提供检验之外的信息,并以菲律宾农村家庭食品需求研究示例。
阅读关注点
阅读全文时应核对敏感性参数对应哪些有效性违背、过度识别检验信息如何进入分析,以及因果参数的结论如何随参数变化。
阅读边界
仅据 OpenAlex 索引摘要,稿件版本未注明;摘要未提供敏感性参数定义和应用结果,过度识别检验通过也不能证明工具有效。

原文摘要

Instrumental variables regression (IV regression) is a method for making causal inferences about the effect of a treatment based on an observational study in which there are unmeasured confounding variables. The method requires one or more valid instrumental variables (IVs); a valid IV is a variable that is associated with the treatment, is independent of unmeasured confounding variables, and has no direct effect on the outcome. Often there is uncertainty about the validity of the proposed IVs. When a researcher proposes more than one IV, the validity of these IVs can be tested through the “overidentifying restrictions test.” Although the overidentifying restrictions test does provide some information, the test has no power versus certain alternatives and can have low power versus many alternatives due to its omnibus nature. To fully address uncertainty about the validity of the proposed IVs, we argue that a sensitivity analysis is needed. A sensitivity analysis examines the impact of plausible amounts of invalidity of the proposed IVs on inferences for the parameters of interest. We develop a method of sensitivity analysis for IV regression with overidentifying restrictions that makes full use of the information provided by the overidentifying restrictions test but provides more information than the test by exploring sensitivity to violations of the validity of the proposed IVs in directions for which the test has low power. Our sensitivity analysis uses interpretable parameters that can be discussed with subject matter experts. We illustrate our method using a study of food demand among rural households in the Philippines.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文