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]
st: RE: ivreg2 weak-id statistic and quadratic terms
From
"Schaffer, Mark E" <[email protected]>
To
<[email protected]>
Subject
st: RE: ivreg2 weak-id statistic and quadratic terms
Date
Mon, 20 Feb 2012 22:35:34 -0000
Hi Miroslav, hi all.
I've checked this with the toy auto dataset. I can replicate this
behaviour.
Miroslav - either before or after rescaling your covariates, do the
estimated coefficients vary hugely in scale?
In my toy auto dataset example, I am pretty sure that it is driven by
scaling problems. For example, after
sysuse auto, clear
gen double weight2=weight^2
ivreg2 price (mpg=turn) weight weight2
gives a large weak ID stat of 11.5. But there are big scaling problems
in the first-stage and main estimations, with coeffs that are something
like a factor of 10^8 different in magnitude.
If I estimate and just partial out the constant,
ivreg2 price (mpg=turn) weight weight2, partial(_cons)
the ill-conditioning is less pronounced and I get a weak ID stat of
0.73.
If I partial out all the exogenous covariates,
ivreg2 price (mpg=turn) weight weight2, partial(weight weight2)
the ill-conditioning is gone and I again get a weak ID stat of 0.73.
I will investigate further and will report back to the list if I find
anything more. It may be that -ivreg2- could handle these cases more
robustly.
--Mark (ivreg2 coauthor)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Miros Lav
> Sent: 20 February 2012 21:25
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: st: ivreg2 weak-id statistic and quadratic terms
>
> Dear all,
>
> I am using ivreg2 to estimate a model where a control
> variable enters with a quadratic term. A simplified version
> of the command is as follows
>
> ivreg2 y (a=instrument) x x^2, r cluster(id).
>
> Estimating this model results in a very large
> Kleinbergen-Paap weak-id F statistic.
>
> However, generating z=x/1000 and z^2=z*z and estimating the model
>
> ivreg2 y (a=instrument) z z^2, r cluster(id)
>
> results in a very low Kleinbergen-Paap weak-id F statistic.
>
> (The z-statistics and significance levels in the first and
> second stage regressions are the same as in the previous model.)
>
> Does anyone have an idea why these two equivalent models
> result in very different Kleinbergen-Paap weak-id F statistic?
>
> Thanks for your help!
>
> Miroslav
> *
> * 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/
>
--
Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity
registered under charity number SC000278.
Heriot-Watt University is the Sunday Times
Scottish University of the Year 2011-2012
*
* 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/