Saddlepoint Approximations for Spatial Panel Data Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We develop new higher-order asymptotic techniques for the Gaussian maximum likelihood estimator in a spatial panel data model, with fixed effects, time-varying covariates, and spatially correlated errors. Our saddlepoint density and tail area approximation feature relative error of order O(1/(n(T−1))) with n being the cross-sectional dimension and T the time-series dimension. The main theoretical tool is the tilted-Edgeworth technique in a nonidentically distributed setting. The density approximation is always nonnegative, does not need resampling, and is accurate in the tails. Monte Carlo experiments on density approximation and testing in the presence of nuisance parameters illustrate the good performance of our approximation over first-order asymptotics and Edgeworth expansion. An empirical application to the investment–saving relationship in OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries shows disagreement between testing results based on the first-order asymptotics and saddlepoint techniques. Supplementary materials for this article, including a standardized description of the materials available for reproducing the work, are available as an online supplement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".