跳到正文
收录说明
收录范围
保留计量方法研究、相关统计基础,以及实质涉及计量方法的应用、教程、比较和综述。书评、刊务及明确无关内容不公开;身份或相关性证据不足的记录保留待核,补充可靠材料后可重新判断。
预印本来自 arXiv 计量经济学及相关统计、金融分类和主题检索。主题检索从 2021 年起回补;关注作者追溯更早年份,部分历史文献按已核验编号补录。收录不表示通过同行评审,仍可能遗漏。
本库首次提交范围:2004-06-23 — 2026-10-14。
阅读范围
默认显示本库全部预印本。可选“优先阅读”:至少一位作者同时满足有可核验的本站覆盖期刊正式发表记录,且 OpenAlex 总引用超过 1,000 次。按同一作者身份匹配,两项缺一不可。此筛选提供阅读线索,不作为论文质量判断。
日期与排序
默认按最近修订排序;年份和日期筛选使用首次提交时间。同一 arXiv 编号的修订会合并。仅有月份或年份时,日期区间相交也会纳入。

日期精度:到日 5 篇 · 到月 0 篇 · 到年 0 篇

分类与引用
领域和方法依据题名、摘要初步分类,可人工修正;分类不代表论文质量。引用数采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计版本。
更新与 AI 解读
正常题录、可靠摘要与引用同步继续;日、周、月简报按核实的发表与修订日期汇总,历史补录保留在文献库。AI 解读依据可靠摘要或已核实原文片段,已有解读保留供阅读参考;缺少可靠材料的条目保持待解读,浏览页面不会触发生成。
5 篇论文
导出

Constructing targeted minimum loss/maximum likelihood estimators: a simple illustration to build intuition

构造目标最小损失/最大似然估计量:建立直觉的简单示例

Use of machine learning to estimate nuisance functions (e.g. outcomes models, propensity score models) in estimators used in causal inference is increasingly common, as it can mitigate bias due to model misspecification. However, it can be challenging to achieve valid inference (e.g., estimate valid confidence intervals). The efficient influence function (EIF) provides a recipe to go from a statistical estimand relevant to our causal question, to an estimator that can…

AI 解读阅读原文 ↗BibTeX ↓

Using causal diagrams to assess parallel trends in difference-in-differences studies

利用因果图评估双重差分研究的平行趋势

Difference-in-differences (DID) is popular because it can allow for unmeasured confounding when the key assumption of parallel trends holds. However, there exists little guidance on how to decide a priori whether this assumption is reasonable. We attempt to develop such guidance by considering the relationship between a causal diagram and the parallel trends assumption. This is challenging because parallel trends is scale-dependent and causal diagrams are generally…

AI 解读阅读原文 ↗BibTeX ↓

Pulling back the curtain: the road from statistical estimand to machine-learning based estimator for epidemiologists (no wizard required)

从统计目标量到机器学习估计量:面向流行病学研究者的推导指南

Epidemiologists increasingly use causal inference methods that rely on machine learning, as these approaches can relax unnecessary model specification assumptions. While deriving and studying asymptotic properties of such estimators is a task usually associated with statisticians, it is useful for epidemiologists to understand the steps involved, as epidemiologists are often at the forefront of defining important new research questions and translating them into new…

AI 解读阅读原文 ↗BibTeX ↓

Efficient estimation of longitudinal treatment effects using difference-in-differences and machine learning

利用双重差分与机器学习高效估计纵向处理效应

Difference-in-differences is based on a parallel trends assumption, which states that changes over time in average potential outcomes are independent of treatment assignment, possibly conditional on covariates. With time-varying treatments, parallel trends assumptions can identify many types of parameters, but most work has focused on group-time average treatment effects and similar parameters conditional on the treatment trajectory. This paper focuses instead on…

AI 解读阅读原文 ↗BibTeX ↓

Transporting treatment effects from difference-in-differences studies

将双重差分研究的处理效应迁移至目标总体

Difference-in-differences (DID) is a popular approach to identify the causal effects of treatments and policies in the presence of unmeasured confounding. DID identifies the sample average treatment effect in the treated (SATT). However, a goal of such research is often to inform decision-making in target populations outside the treated sample. Transportability methods have been developed to extend inferences from study samples to external target populations; these methods…

AI 解读阅读原文 ↗BibTeX ↓