MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890041053 · doi:10.1002/jae.2753

Common correlated effects estimation of heterogeneous dynamic panel quantile regression models

2020· article· en· W2890041053 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Harding, Carlos Lamarche, M. Hashem Pesaran

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Econometrics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantile regressionEstimatorQuantileEconometricsPanel dataRegression analysisRegressionMonte Carlo methodStatisticsMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary This paper proposes a quantile regression estimator for a heterogeneous panel model with lagged dependent variables and interactive effects. The paper adopts the Common Correlated Effects (CCE) approach proposed in the literature and demonstrates that the extension to the estimation of dynamic quantile regression models is feasible under similar conditions to the ones used in the literature. The new quantile regression estimator is shown to be consistent and its asymptotic distribution is derived. Monte Carlo studies are carried out to study the small sample behavior of the proposed approach. The evidence shows that the estimator can significantly improve on the performance of existing estimators as long as the time series dimension of the panel is large. We present an application to the evaluation of Time‐of‐Use pricing using a large randomized control trial.

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)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations50
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied EconometricsSame topicSpatial and Panel Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207