Instrumental variable estimation in ordinal probit models with mismeasured predictors
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 Researchers in the medical, health, and social sciences routinely encounter ordinal variables such as self‐reports of health or happiness. When modelling ordinal outcome variables, it is common to have covariates, for example, attitudes, family income, retrospective variables, measured with error. As is well known, ignoring even random error in covariates can bias coefficients and hence prejudice the estimates of effects. We propose an instrumental variable approach to the estimation of a probit model with an ordinal response and mismeasured predictor variables. We obtain likelihood‐based and method of moments estimators that are consistent and asymptotically normally distributed under general conditions. These estimators are easy to compute, perform well and are robust against the normality assumption for the measurement errors in our simulation studies. The proposed method is applied to both simulated and real data. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 47: 653–667; 2019 © 2019 Statistical Society of Canada
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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