Precision estimation in sample survey inference: A criterion for choice between variance estimators
抽样调查精度估计:方差估计量的选择准则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:摘要讨论抽样调查方差估计的通用评价准则,未指向所列领域中的特定模型或应用。
抽样调查精度估计:方差估计量的选择准则AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
We advocate the 'mean squared error of predicted squared error' as a universal criterion for the choice between variance estimators in sample survey inference. The predictive nature of the measure rewards variance estimators adapted to the amount of information in the actual sample. This makes the new measure more satisfactory than the simpler mean squared error of the variance estimator. The criterion turns out to be the same for design-based as for model-based inference, and may also be used for comparison between the design- and model-based theoretical variances. The theory is exemplified for the ratio estimator by a study of six variance estimators suggested in the literature. These calculations are primarily made under a proportional regression model, but consideration is also paid to model robustness. Three of the six estimators are shown to be inferior to the three others, which are approximately equivalent.