MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2556570651 · doi:10.1017/s0266466615000341

BOOTSTRAP AND<i>k</i>-STEP BOOTSTRAP BIAS CORRECTIONS FOR THE FIXED EFFECTS ESTIMATOR IN NONLINEAR PANEL DATA MODELS

2016· article· en· W2556570651 on OpenAlexaff
Min Seong Kim, Yixiao Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueEconometric Theory · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsEstimatorMonte Carlo methodFixed effects modelStatisticsSample size determinationPanel dataNonlinear systemApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Because of the incidental parameters problem, the fixed effects maximum likelihood estimator in a nonlinear panel data model is in general inconsistent when the time series length T is short and fixed. Even if T approaches infinity but at a rate not faster than the cross sectional sample size n , the fixed effects estimator is still asymptotically biased. This paper proposes using the standard bootstrap and k -step bootstrap to correct the bias. We establish the asymptotic validity of the bootstrap bias corrections for both model parameters and average marginal effects. Our results apply to static models as well as some dynamic Markov models. Monte Carlo simulations show that our procedures are effective in reducing the bias of the fixed effects estimator and improving the coverage accuracy of the associated confidence interval.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.155
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.155
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.068 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconometric TheorySame topicSpatial and Panel Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207