Interval Estimation for Log-Linear Models with One Variable Subject to Non-Ignorable Non-Response
单变量存在不可忽略无应答时对数线性模型的区间估计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:研究核心是列联表无应答模型的边界区间推断,面板研究仅为模拟依据,不足以归入面板方法。
单变量存在不可忽略无应答时对数线性模型的区间估计AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Summary Log-linear models for multiway contingency tables where one variable is subject to non-ignorable non-response will often yield boundary solutions, with the probability of non-respondents being classified in some cells of the table estimated as 0. The paper considers the effect of this non-standard behaviour on two methods of interval estimation based on the distribution of the maximum likelihood estimator. The first method relies on the estimator being approximately normally distributed with variance equal to the inverse of the information matrix. It is shown that the information matrix is singular for boundary solutions, but intervals can be calculated after a simple transformation. For the second method, based on the bootstrap, asymptotic results suggest that the coverage properties may be poor for boundary solutions. Both methods are compared with profile likelihood intervals in a simulation study based on data from the British General Election Panel Study. The results of this study indicate that all three methods perform poorly for a parameter of the non-response model, whereas they all perform well for a parameter of the margin model, irrespective of whether or not there is a boundary solution.