GMM Estimation of Fixed Effects Dynamic Panel Data Models with Spatial Lag and Spatial Errors (Revised version of CentER DP 2011-134)
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
The three-step generalized methods of moments (GMM) approach of Kapoor, Kelejian and Prucha (2007), which corrects for spatially correlated errors in static panel data models, is extended by introducing fixed effects, a spatial lag, and a one-period lag of the dependent variable as additional explanatory variables. Combining this approach with the dynamic panel-data GMM estimators of Arellano and Bond (1991) and Blundell and Bond (1998) and specifying moment conditions for various time lags, spatial lags, and sets of exogenous variables yields new spatial dynamic panel data estimators. The proposed spatially corrected GMM estimates are based on a spatial lag and a transformation correcting for the spatial error correlation. We prove their consistency and asymptotic normality for a large number of spatial units and a fixed number of time periods. Feasible spatial correction based on estimated spatial error correlation is shown to lead to estimators that are asymptotically equivalent to the infeasible estimators based on a known spatial error correlation. Monte Carlo simulations show that the root mean squared error of spatially corrected GMM estimates is generally smaller than that of corresponding spatial GMM estimates in which spatial error correlation is ignored.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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