MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127969728 · doi:10.1017/s0266466609100117

MANY INSTRUMENTS ASYMPTOTIC APPROXIMATIONS UNDER NONNORMAL ERROR DISTRIBUTIONS

2009· article· en· W2127969728 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

VenueEconometric Theory · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsEstimatorAsymptotic distributionStatisticsAsymptotic analysisApplied mathematicsVariance (accounting)Distribution (mathematics)Delta methodSample size determinationSampling (signal processing)Mathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we derive an alternative asymptotic approximation to the sampling distribution of the limited information maximum likelihood estimator and a bias-corrected version of the two-stage least squares estimator. The approximation is obtained by allowing the number of instruments and the concentration parameter to grow at the same rate as the sample size. More specifically, we allow for potentially nonnormal error distributions and obtain the conventional asymptotic distribution and the results of Bekker (1994, Econometrica 62, 657–681) and Bekker and Van der Ploeg (2005, Statistica Neerlandica 59, 139–267) as special cases. The results show that when the error distribution is not normal, in general both the properties of the instruments and the third and fourth moments of the errors affect the asymptotic variance. We compare our findings with those in the recent literature on many and weak instruments.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.195 · 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