Small Sample Properties of Probit Model Estimators
Probit 模型估计量的小样本性质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:摘要直接研究 Probit 模型的极大似然估计、协方差估计与有限样本检验,对应离散选择方法。
Probit 模型估计量的小样本性质AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
When maximum likelihood estimates of the coefficients in a nonlinear model such as the probit model are obtained there are a number of asymptotically equivalent covariance matrix estimators that can be used. These covariance matrix estimators are typically associated with different computer algorithms. For example, with the Newton–Raphson algorithm the inverse of the negative of the Hessian matrix from the log-likelihood function is used; with the method of scoring the inverse of the information matrix is used; and with a procedure proposed by Berndt, Hall, Hall, and Hausman (1974), the inverse of the outer product of the first derivatives of the log-likelihood function is used. Although these three estimators are asymptotically equivalent, their performance can vary in finite samples. The main objective of this article is to use a Monte Carlo experiment to investigate the finite sample properties of the three covariance matrix estimators, in the context of maximum likelihood estimation of the probit model. Related questions concerning the empirical distributions of test statistics and the properties of a preliminary test estimator are also examined, under varying degrees of multicollinearity. We find that, on average, the Hessian matrix and the information matrix give almost identical results and lead to more accurate estimates of the asymptotic covariance matrix than does the estimator based on first derivatives. The finite sample mean squared error of the maximum likelihood estimator, however, is considerably greater than the asymptotic covariance matrix, and the estimator based on first derivatives provides a better estimate of finite sample mean squared error. All three estimators lead to empirical distributions that can be approximated by an asymptotic normal distribution. The pretest estimator formed by testing for the omission of an explanatory variable is reasonably efficient, but its distribution is seldom well approximated by a normal distribution.