MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156042878 · doi:10.1016/j.jeconom.2022.04.001

Cluster-robust inference: A guide to empirical practice

2022· article· en· W3156042878 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Econometrics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIncome, Poverty, and Inequality
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityQueen's University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaDanmarks GrundforskningsfondNational Research Foundation
KeywordsInferenceEconometricsCluster (spacecraft)Computer scienceBridge (graph theory)Empirical researchEmpirical evidenceEconomicsIndirect InferenceManagement scienceData scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsStatisticsEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Methods for cluster-robust inference are routinely used in economics and many other disciplines. However, it is only recently that theoretical foundations for the use of these methods in many empirically relevant situations have been developed. In this paper, we use these theoretical results to provide a guide to empirical practice. We do not attempt to present a comprehensive survey of the (very large) literature. Instead, we bridge theory and practice by providing a thorough guide on what to do and why, based on recently available econometric theory and simulation evidence. To practice what we preach, we include an empirical analysis of the effects of the minimum wage on labor supply of teenagers using individual data.

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 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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.260
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.160 · 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