MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2960589199 · doi:10.1002/jae.2737

Interval censored regression with fixed effects

2019· article· en· W2960589199 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jason Abrevaya, Chris Muris

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Econometrics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentIowa State UniversityMcGill University
KeywordsStatisticsEstimatorMathematicsEconometricsLogitLogistic regressionSemiparametric modelSemiparametric regressionCensored regression modelParametric statisticsHeteroscedasticity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers identification and estimation of a fixed-effects model with an interval-censored dependent variable. In each time period, the researcher observes the interval (with known endpoints) in which the dependent variable lies but not the value of the dependent variable itself. Two versions of the model are considered: a parametric model with logistic errors and a semiparametric model with errors having an unspecified distribution. In both cases, the error disturbances can be heteroskedastic over cross-sectional units as long as they are stationary within a cross-sectional unit; the semiparametric model also allows for serial correlation of the error disturbances. A conditional-logit-type composite likelihood estimator is proposed for the logistic fixed-effects model, and a composite maximum-score-type estimator is proposed for the semiparametric model. In general, the scale of the coefficient parameters is identified by these estimators, meaning that the causal effects of interest are estimated directly in cases where the latent dependent variable is of primary interest (e.g., pure data-coding situations). Monte Carlo simulations and an empirical application to birthweight outcomes illustrate the performance of the parametric estimator.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied EconometricsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207