MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121169149 · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.273594

Bayesian Estimation of Dynamic Discrete Choice Models

2006· article· en· W3121169149 on OpenAlexaff
Susumu Imai, Neelam Jain, Andrew T. Ching

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Market Behavior and Pricing
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurse of dimensionalityMarkov chain Monte CarloDynamic programmingMathematical optimizationBayesian probabilityComputer scienceGridPosterior probabilityMonte Carlo methodAlgorithmMarkov chainBayes estimatorStructural estimationMathematicsStatisticsArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a new methodology for structural estimation of dynamic discrete choice models. We combine the Dynamic Programming (DP) solution algorithm with the Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo algorithm into a single algorithm that solves the DP problem and estimates the parameters simultaneously. As a result, the computational burden of estimating a dynamic model becomes comparable to that of a static model. Another feature of our algorithm is that even though per solution-estimation iteration, the number of grid points on the state variable is small, the number of effective grid points increases with the number of estimation iterations. This is how we help ease the "Curse of Dimensionality". We simulate and estimate several versions of a simple model of entry and exit to illustrate our methodology. We also prove that under standard conditions, the parameters converge in probability to the true posterior distribution, regardless of the starting values.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)Same topicConsumer Market Behavior and PricingFrench-language works237,207