What Impulse Response Do Instrumental Variables Identify?
工具变量究竟识别哪一种脉冲响应?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。
本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。
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:摘要直接研究局部投影工具变量的结构冲击脉冲响应,并应用于财政与货币冲击。
工具变量究竟识别哪一种脉冲响应?AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
The local projection-instrumental variable (LP-IV) literature has been largely silent on cases in which impulse responses are set-identified, arising when the shock of interest is composite and instruments are correlated with multiple components. We demonstrate that LP-IV estimands constructed using one instrument at a time identify affine combinations of impulse responses to structural shock components with instrument-specific and potentially negative weights, challenging standard causal interpretation. The two-stage least squares compounds the identification problem. However, we show that individual LP-IV estimands characterize the identified set when sign restrictions on the correlations between instruments and structural shock components are imposed. Under weak stationarity, these identified sets are sharp and cannot be further narrowed in key cases. Two empirical examples--decomposing the U.S. government spending multiplier and disentangling pure monetary shocks from central bank information shocks--illustrate the usefulness of our approach.