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:核心是通用矩约束模型的识别检验,跨期替代弹性应用不足以确定所列具体领域。

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
Bertille Antoine
Eric Renault

识别强度检验

研究问题
在可能弱识别的矩约束模型中,如何判断工具变量是否弱到使标准高斯渐近推断不可靠,并单独检验目标参数子向量?
方法与思路
作者依据 GMM 一阶条件的泰勒展开,区分线性或参数可分模型与一般非线性模型,构造弱识别检验并允许检验参数子向量。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称方法无需假定未受检参数已识别,在线性异方差情形扩展第一阶段 F 检验;模拟及跨期替代弹性应用展示其表现。
阅读关注点
应核对两类模型弱识别原假设的差异、子向量检验如何处理其余参数,以及异方差校准和经验应用中的识别判定依据。
阅读边界
摘要未说明检验阈值、完整条件及模拟数值;应用中的强弱识别结论依赖所用模型,不能直接视为其他设定下的结论。

原文摘要

We consider models defined by a set of moment restrictions that may be subject to weak identification. We propose a testing procedure to assess whether instruments are “too weak” for standard (Gaussian) asymptotic theory to be reliable. Since the validity of standard asymptotics for GMM rests upon a Taylor expansion of the first order conditions, we distinguish two cases: (i) models that are either linear or separable in the parameters of interest; (ii) general models that are neither linear nor separable. Our testing procedure is similar in both cases, but our null hypothesis of weak identification for a nonlinear model is broader than the popular one. Our test is straightforward to apply and allows to test the null hypothesis of weak identification of specific subvectors without assuming identification of the components not under test. In the linear case, it can be seen as a generalization of the popular first-stage F-test but allows us to fix its shortcomings in case of heteroskedasticity. In simulations, our test is well behaved when compared to contenders, both in terms of size and power. In particular, the focus on subvectors allows us to have power to reject the null of weak identification on some components of interest. This observation may explain why, when applied to the estimation of the Elasticity of Intertemporal Substitution, our test is the only one to find matching results for every country under the two symmetric popular specifications: the intercept parameter is always found strongly identified, whereas the slope parameter is always found weakly identified.

笔记与分组