Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
re:st: Are standard errors valid when the F-stat is missing?
From
Christopher Baum <[email protected]>
To
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject
re:st: Are standard errors valid when the F-stat is missing?
Date
Wed, 28 Dec 2011 13:58:15 -0500
<>
I´m estimating an OLS regression using the robust option for a main
sample and different subsamples. For the main sample I obtained the F
stat and all the st. errors; however, for the subsamples the F stat is
missing. I have checked and this is due to the fact that for some of
the subsamples there are variables with few non-zero observations.
Even though I could go and check for each subsample which variables
are those and dropped them from the estimation, I was wondering if the
standard errors obtained for each of the variables in the subsample
are valid under the scenario with the F-stat missing for the
estimation.
It would be useful to see the actual output from one of the subsamples. OLS does not care how many
zero values there are in a regressor as long as not all of them are zero, so 'few non-zero observations'
matters not.
Kit
Kit Baum | Boston College Economics and DIW Berlin | http://ideas.repec.org/e/pba1.html
An Introduction to Stata Programming | http://www.stata-press.com/books/isp.html
An Introduction to Modern Econometrics Using Stata | http://www.stata-press.com/books/imeus.html
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/