Nonparametric Instrumental Variable Estimation in Practice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper investigates recent developments in the literature on nonparametric instrumental variables estimation and considers the practical importance of the features of these estimators in the context of typically applied econometric models. Our primary focus is on the estimation of econometric models with endogenous regressors, and their marginal effects, without a known functional form. We develop an estimator for the marginal effects and investigate its finite sample performance. We show that when instruments are weak, in the classic sense, the nonparametric estimates of the marginal effect outperforms the classic two-stage least squares estimator, even when the model is correctly specified. When the instruments are strong, we show that the nonparametric estimator for the partial effects is still effective compared to the two-stage least squares estimator even as the number of IVs increases. We also investigate bandwidth choice and find that a rule-of-thumb bandwidth performs relatively well. Whereas cross-validation leads to a better fit when the number of instruments is small, as the number of instruments increases the rule-of-thumb standard actually results in better model fit. In an empirical application we estimate the work-horse aggregate logit demand model, discuss the required nonparametric identification properties, and document the differences between nonparametric and parametric specifications on the estimation of demand elasticities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it