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:摘要围绕内生解释变量、弱工具变量及工具变量推断展开,对应因果推断中的工具变量方法方向。

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
Gary Chamberlain
Guido Imbens

多工具变量下的随机效应估计量

研究问题
当工具变量数量多且与内生解释变量相关性弱时,如何改进估计与区间推断,并判断传统工具变量估计量的大样本近似是否可靠?
方法与思路
作者在单个内生解释变量与工具变量的关系中引入随机系数,将其方差设为未知参数,并分析传统估计量在特定情形下与受限随机效应似然的近似联系。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称该方法可诊断传统近似失准,指出多弱工具下 LIML 区间可能覆盖不足;在所述实证及配套模拟中,新估计量的覆盖率与风险表现更好。
阅读关注点
阅读全文时应核对随机系数分布和方差设定、工具变量数量随样本增长的方式、似然近似的适用情形,以及诊断统计量与置信区间的构造条件。
阅读边界
摘要未给出识别条件、工具变量有效性要求及模拟设计;所述表现改善限于文中应用与模拟,不能据此认定所有多弱工具情形下均更优。

原文摘要

In this paper we propose a new estimator for a model with one endogenous regressor and many instrumental variables. Our motivation comes from the recent literature on the poor properties of standard instrumental variables estimators when the instrumental variables are weakly correlated with the endogenous regressor. Our proposed estimator puts a random coefficients structure on the relation between the endogenous regressor and the instruments. The variance of the random coefficients is modelled as an unknown parameter. In addition to proposing a new estimator, our analysis yields new insights into the properties of the standard two-stage least squares (TSLS) and limited-information maximum likelihood (LIML) estimators in the case with many weak instruments. We show that in some interesting cases, TSLS and LIML can be approximated by maximizing the random effects likelihood subject to particular constraints. We show that statistics based on comparisons of the unconstrained estimates of these parameters to the implicit TSLS and LIML restrictions can be used to identify settings when standard large sample approximations to the distributions of TSLS and LIML are likely to perform poorly. We also show that with many weak instruments, LIML confidence intervals are likely to have under-coverage, even though its finite sample distribution is approximately centered at the true value of the parameter. In an application with real data and simulations around this data set, the proposed estimator performs markedly better than TSLS and LIML, both in terms of coverage rate and in terms of risk.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文