MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062433599 · doi:10.1214/10-bjps127

GMM versus GQL inferences in semiparametric linear dynamic mixed models

2012· article· en· W2062433599 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrazilian Journal of Probability and Statistics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsSemiparametric modelEconometricsSemiparametric regressionApplied mathematicsStatisticsNonparametric statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Linear dynamic mixed models are commonly used for continuous panel data analysis in economic statistics. There exists generalized method of moments (GMM) and generalized quasi-likelihood (GQL) inferences for binary and count panel data models, the GQL estimation approach being more efficient than the GMM approach. The GMM and GQL estimating equations for the linear dynamic mixed model can not, however, be obtained from the respective estimating equations under the nonlinear models for binary and count data. In this paper, we develop the GMM and GQL estimation approaches for the linear dynamic mixed models and demonstrate that the GQL approach is more efficient than the GMM approach, also under such linear models. This makes the GQL approach uniformly more efficient than the GMM approach in estimating the parameters of both linear and nonlinear dynamic mixed models.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it