Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
From | Alex MacKay <mackay@uchicago.edu> |
To | statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |
Subject | Re: st: RE: Matsize and Estimation of the Variance Matrix in a Regression |
Date | Wed, 4 Sep 2013 11:02:44 -0500 |
1. The full specification is: areg ln_price treatment postperiod treatmentXpostperiod ln_unemployment ln_population ln_income price_index /// i.week i.retailer_id i.state, absorb(product) vce(cluster clusterID) 2. The fixed effects variables are stored as integers. 3. I'm increasing the matsize because I am running several regressions, and for some I run into the issue: "matsize too small." I re-ran all regressions, and for a few (like the one above) that did not have the error, the results changed. Alex On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Joe Canner <jcanner1@jhmi.edu> wrote: > Alex, > > I'm no -areg- expert, but I would suggestion that if you want get more traction with this question, you should probably provide additional information, including: > > 1. The complete specification of your model > 2. A description of the variables in your model (e.g., if categorical, how many levels) > 3. Why you are increasing the -matsize- in the first place > > I suspect that the model has some intrinsic problems that need to be fixed (perhaps something similar to what you have suggested) which will probably take care of the -matsize- issue (which is probably more of a symptom than a cause), but we would need to know more before offering a solution. > > Regards, > Joe Canner > Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Alex MacKay > Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 9:58 AM > To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu > Subject: st: Matsize and Estimation of the Variance Matrix in a Regression > > Dear statalist, > > I have run into an issue that when I increase the matsize, it can > cause a regression that previously ran with no warnings to return: > "Warning: variance matrix is nonsymmetric or highly singular." > > It estimates the exact same coefficients across the board. I've put > the log for the first coefficient below. Notice the Warning in advance > of the output. With the larger matsize (10000), it does not estimate > standard errors, and the model degrees of freedom are zero. > > I am using the areg command to absorb the variable product_id. Is it > possible that Stata is trying to generate a number of fixed effects > that exceed 800, the original matsize, and decides to drop the > product_id dummy variables? This may allow it to estimate standard > errors. If so, I think it should be reported as a bug. > > Alex > > (Note: I'm reposting in a way that may more clearly identify the > issues, now that I am familiar with replying). > > > //Matsize = 10000 > > > note: 2599.week omitted because of collinearity > note: 597.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 866.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 877.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 9101.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 54.state_id omitted because of collinearity > Warning: variance matrix is nonsymmetric or highly singular > note: 3997.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 4955.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 7005.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 7599.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > > Linear regression, absorbing indicators Number of obs = 597 > > F( 0, 45) = . > Prob > F = . > R-squared = 0.9256 > Adj R-squared = 0.8695 > Root MSE = 0.2950 > > (Std. Err. adjusted for 46 clusters in clusterID) > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > | Robust > ln_price | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] > -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- > treatment | -4.044072 . . . > . . > > > > //Matsize == 800 > > note: 2599.week omitted because of collinearity > note: 597.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 866.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 877.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 9101.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 54.fips omitted because of collinearity > note: 3997.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 4955.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 7005.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > note: 7599.retailer_id omitted because of collinearity > > Linear regression, absorbing indicators Number of obs = 597 > > F( 49, 45) = . > Prob > F = . > R-squared = 0.9256 > Adj R-squared = 0.8695 > Root MSE = 0.3085 > > (Std. Err. adjusted for 46 clusters in clusterID) > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > | Robust > ln_price | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] > -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- > treatment | -4.044072 3.152507 -1.28 0.206 > -10.39355 2.305404 > * > * 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/ * * 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/