An Empirical Study of Response and Sampling Errors for Multiplicity Estimates with Different Counting Rules
不同计数规则下多重报告估计的回答与抽样误差:实证研究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:家庭关联用于调查中的多重报告与计数,没有涉及网络效应或干扰识别,故不据此选择网络领域。
不同计数规则下多重报告估计的回答与抽样误差:实证研究AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
The components of the mean square error (MSE) of estimates from surveys with multiplicity, where households report on events which occurred in them and also in other households (linked to them according to well-specified counting rules), can be estimated on the basis of a specially designed evaluation survey, under certain simplifying assumptions. The empirical results from such a survey, designed to estimate births and marriages, indicate that a wide counting rule is more efficient than a conventional rule, since the slightly higher response bias and variance are more than offset by the reduction in sampling variance.