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
分类依据题名和摘要中的方法词与领域语境,不使用期刊名称猜测研究方向。
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
原文摘要
Summary This note discusses two errors in the approach proposed in Canay (2011) for constructing a computationally simple two-step estimator in a quantile regression model with quantile-independent fixed effects. Firstly, we show that Canay’s assumption about n/Ts → 0 for some s > 1 is not strong enough and can entail severe bias or even the non-existence of the limiting distribution for the estimator of the vector of coefficients. The condition n/T → 0 appears to be closer to the required set of restrictions. These problems are likely to cause incorrect inference in applied papers with large n/T, but the impact is less in applications with small n/T. In an attempt to improve Canay’s estimator, we propose a simple correction that may reduce the bias. The second error concerns the incorrect asymptotic standard error of the estimator of the constant term. We show that, contrary to Canay’s assumption, the within estimator has an influence function that is not i.i.d. and this affects inference. Moreover, the constant term is unlikely to be estimable at rate $\sqrt{nT}$, so a different estimator may not be available. However, the issue concerning the constant term does not have an effect on slope coefficients. Finally, we give recommendations to practitioners and conduct a meta-review of applied papers that use Canay’s estimator.