Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
From | Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com> |
To | "statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu" <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |
Subject | Re: st: xtlogit: panel data transformation's recast to double makes model incomputable |
Date | Wed, 3 Apr 2013 12:04:25 +0100 |
My intentions are to help you think about what you are doing. I don't think I can advise at all on what's a realistic data generation process for your data and therefore I don't have extra suggestions for your analyses. Quite apart from anything else, I don't think you have said anything much about the data and what underlies them, but I've seen enough to know that I am not working on similar data. It is difficult to keep track of the various models that you have tried, including -logit-, -xtlogit-, -clogit- and perhaps others. Ideally, you should not be trying for whatever will fit, but choosing a model because the associated generation process matches your data and the problem. I am asking what are you assuming about the dependence structure of your data within panels, and your answer implies to me that you haven't thought about it and/or are not aware of the associated statistical issues. (Econometric issues, if you prefer.) By choosing -xtlogit, fe- you make one set of choices that way, but as the help for -xtlogit- explains, other choices allow differing assumptions about correlation structure. Nick On 3 April 2013 11:38, Tom <tommedema@gmail.com> wrote: > "Your various models all > appear to be implying that there is no dependence other than implied > by the panel structure, that is to say that prices at successive dates > for the same panel are mutually independent, which seems a very strong > assumption to me." > > This is not my intention. I've set the within-group date for this > exact reason. Why do you suspect that I am assuming such independence > among dates within the same group? > > Or mayhaps your intentions will become clear to me if you tell me what > you'd suggest me to do. At the moment I'm not quite sure. > > Thank you. I will use the - character from now on to indicate commands. > > Tom > > On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think you are missing my point. Time series have some kind of >> dependence structure, unless they happen to be white noise. Ignoring >> that dependence won't make it disappear. Your various models all >> appear to be implying that there is no dependence other than implied >> by the panel structure, that is to say that prices at successive dates >> for the same panel are mutually independent, which seems a very strong >> assumption to me. >> >> A tiny point of presentation, yet another covered in the FAQ. Left >> ticks around command names such as `tsset` have no special effects on >> Statalist; the convention recommended is exemplified by -tsset-. >> >> Nick >> >> On 3 April 2013 10:13, Tom <tommedema@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hi Nick, >>> >>> They are time series. `tsset` returns: >>> >>> panel variable: ticker_id (unbalanced) >>> time variable: date, 101 to 532 >>> delta: 1 unit >>> >>> Each group has its own continuous time frame, ranging from 101 to 532 >>> (the first 100 dates have been dropped because they were required to >>> create lagged variables). >>> >>> The only issue that I could possible see arising from time series is >>> that the dates are not "synchronised" inbetween groups. With this I >>> mean that t == 200 is a different point in time for id == 1 than t == >>> 200 for the group with id == 2. >>> >>> But I don't think time series are the issue because clogit is not >>> using them (it only uses the panel id variable), and it is returning >>> exactly the same results as xtlogit. >>> >>> I was hoping that something obvious would arise from the many log >>> files I submitted a couple of posts back :) >>> >>> Tom >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> As if there weren't enough problems, what is the assumption here about >>>> time series structure? I may have missed something in a complicated >>>> thread, but the original data look like time series to me. * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/ * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/