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:摘要核心是选择性缺失协变量的非参数回归与权重识别,未明确建立对应所列细分的模型或效应。

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
Christoph Breunig
Peter Haan

协变量选择性缺失下的非参数回归

研究问题
当协变量因非随机选择而仅在部分样本中可观测时,如何识别并估计非参数回归函数,避免忽略缺失机制导致的偏差?
方法与思路
作者使用影响潜在协变量但不直接影响选择的工具变量,在部分完备性下识别分式概率权重,并构造对应的级数估计量。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称,方法给出构造性识别、收敛率和逐点渐近分布,且相关渐近表现不受非参数工具变量逆问题的影响。
阅读关注点
应核对工具变量对选择的排除条件、部分完备性的原始条件、权重函数的分母限制,以及收入应用中的工具变量依据。
阅读边界
仅据所给出版社摘要,无法验证工具变量有效性或识别条件;选择修正后的收入关联也不能自动解释为因果效应。

原文摘要

We consider the problem of regression with selectively observed covariates in a nonparametric framework. Our approach relies on instrumental variables that explain variation in the latent covariates but have no direct effect on selection. The regression function of interest is shown to be a weighted version of observed conditional expectation where the weighting function is a fraction of selection probabilities. Nonparametric identification of the fractional probability weight (FPW) function is achieved via a partial completeness assumption. We provide primitive functional form assumptions for partial completeness to hold. The identification result is constructive for the FPW series estimator. We derive the rate of convergence and also the pointwise asymptotic distribution. In both cases, the asymptotic performance of the FPW series estimator does not suffer from the inverse problem which derives from the nonparametric instrumental variable approach. In a Monte Carlo study, we analyze the finite sample properties of our estimator and we compare our approach to inverse probability weighting, which can be used alternatively for unconditional moment estimation. In the empirical application, we focus on two different applications. We estimate the association between income and health using linked data from the SHARE survey and administrative pension information and use pension entitlements as an instrument. In the second application we revisit the question how income affects the demand for housing based on data from the German Socio–Economic Panel Study (SOEP). In this application we use regional income information on the residential block level as an instrument. In both applications we show that income is selectively missing and we demonstrate that standard methods that do not account for the nonrandom selection process lead to significantly biased estimates for individuals with low income.

笔记与分组