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: gradient and the inverse of the information matrix
From
John Antonakis <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: gradient and the inverse of the information matrix
Date
Wed, 01 May 2013 23:22:03 +0200
Hi:
If you estimate your model with -sem- score tests are possible by using
-estat mindices-; see also -estat scoretests.
Also see the userwritten command -scoregrp- (available through ssc).
Best,
J.
__________________________________________
John Antonakis
Professor of Organizational Behavior
Director, Ph.D. Program in Management
Faculty of Business and Economics
University of Lausanne
Internef #618
CH-1015 Lausanne-Dorigny
Switzerland
Tel ++41 (0)21 692-3438
Fax ++41 (0)21 692-3305
http://www.hec.unil.ch/people/jantonakis
Associate Editor
The Leadership Quarterly
__________________________________________
On 01.05.2013 23:01, Jon Mu wrote:
Hi Statalisters,
I am trying to check into the (Rao's) score (or commonly known as the Lagrange Multiplier) test for a model that I am working on. I got results from SAS already, and I want to see if those from SAS would square with the one produced from my own Stata codes.
They don't match, and looks like I probably made some mistakes in my Stata codes. For the generalized formula to get the Chi-Square statistic, I need to get the gradient and the inverse of the information matrix. For the inverse of the information matrix, I can grab from e(V) directly without any further calculation.
So I might've made some mistake in the gradient. I've searched through the voluminous Stata pdf documentation using gradient as the key word, and I was not able to find useful information. But I vaguely remember a while back ago when I was also checking into related issues, I read somewhere that the e(gradient) matrix is a gradient with respect to xb, not b, so I suspect that might be the cause. I am wondering if that's the case. If I am right on this, then a follow-up question is how to recover the gradient with respect to b since I feel there might not be a linear transformation that I can use to get it directly. Any input/suggestion would be appreciated.
Jun Xu, PhD
Associate Professor
Department of Sociology
Ball State University
Muncie, IN 46037
*
* 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/
*
* 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/