Standard Errors for EM Estimation
EM估计的标准误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:摘要讨论通用EM算法的标准误计算,混合模型与缺失数据例子不足以对应所列经济学细分方向。
EM估计的标准误AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Summary The EM algorithm is a popular method for computing maximum likelihood estimates. One of its drawbacks is that it does not produce standard errors as a by-product. We consider obtaining standard errors by numerical differentiation. Two approaches are considered. The first differentiates the Fisher score vector to yield the Hessian of the log-likelihood. The second differentiates the EM operator and uses an identity that relates its derivative to the Hessian of the log-likelihood. The well-known SEM algorithm uses the second approach. We consider three additional algorithms: one that uses the first approach and two that use the second. We evaluate the complexity and precision of these three and the SEM in algorithm seven examples. The first is a single-parameter example used to give insight. The others are three examples in each of two areas of EM application: Poisson mixture models and the estimation of covariance from incomplete data. The examples show that there are algorithms that are much simpler and more accurate than the SEM algorithm. Hopefully their simplicity will increase the availability of standard error estimates in EM applications. It is shown that, as previously conjectured, a symmetry diagnostic can accurately estimate errors arising from numerical differentiation. Some issues related to the speed of the EM algorithm and algorithms that differentiate the EM operator are identified.