Improved methods for moment restriction models with data combination and an application to two‐sample instrumental variable estimation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Combining‐100 information from multiple samples is often needed in biomedical and economic studies, but differences between these samples must be appropriately taken into account in the analysis of the combined data. We study the estimation for moment restriction models with data combined from two samples under an ignorability‐type assumption while allowing for different marginal distributions of variables common to both samples. Suppose that an outcome regression (OR) model and a propensity score (PS) model are specified. By leveraging semi‐parametric efficiency theory, we derive an augmented inverse probability‐weighted (AIPW) estimator that is locally efficient and doubly robust with respect to these models. Furthermore, we develop calibrated regression and likelihood estimators that are not only locally efficient and doubly robust but also intrinsically efficient in achieving smaller variances than the AIPW estimator when the PS model is correctly specified but the OR model may be mispecified. As an important application, we study the two‐sample instrumental variable problem and derive the corresponding estimators while allowing for incompatible distributions of variables common to the two samples. Finally, we provide a simulation study and an econometric application on public housing projects to demonstrate the superior performance of our improved estimators. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 48: 259–284; 2020 © 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.
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 | 0.045 | 0.106 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".