Higher-Order Expansions for Estimators in the Presence of Nuisance Parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Higher-order asymptotic methods for nonlinear models with nuisance parameters are developed. We allow for both one-step estimators, in which the nuisance and parameters of interest are jointly estimated; and also two-step (or iterated) estimators, in which the nuisance parameters are first estimated. The properties of the former, although in principle simpler to conceptualize, are more difficult to establish explicitly. The iterated estimators allow for a variety of scenarios. The results indicate when second-order considerations should be taken into account when conducting inferences with two-step estimators. The results in the paper accomplish three objectives: (i) provide simpler methods for deriving higher-order moments when nuisance parameters are present; (ii) indicate more explicitly the sources of deviations of estimators’ sampling distributions from that given by standard first-order asymptotic theory; and, in turn, (iii) indicate in which situations the corrections (either analytically or by a resampling method such as bootstrap or jackknife) should be made when making inferences. We illustrate using several popular examples in econometrics. We also provide a numerical example which highlights how a simple analytical bias correction can improve inferences.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".