Inference with Dependent Data in Accounting and Finance Applications
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 We review developments in conducting inference for model parameters in the presence of intertemporal and cross‐sectional dependence with an emphasis on panel data applications. We review the use of heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent (HAC) standard error estimators, which include the standard clustered and multiway clustered estimators, and discuss alternative sample‐splitting inference procedures, such as the Fama–Macbeth procedure, within this context. We outline pros and cons of the different procedures. We then illustrate the properties of the discussed procedures within a simulation experiment designed to mimic the type of firm‐level panel data that might be encountered in accounting and finance applications. Our conclusion, based on theoretical properties and simulation performance, is that sample‐splitting procedures with suitably chosen splits are the most likely to deliver robust inferential statements with approximately correct coverage properties in the types of large, heterogeneous panels many researchers are likely to face.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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