Search

This paper studies optimal decision rules, including estimators and tests, for weakly identified GMM models. We derive the limit experiment for weakly identified GMM, and propose a theoretically‐motivated class of priors which give rise to quasi‐Bayes decision rules as a limiting case. Together with results in the previous literature, this establishes desirable properties for the quasi‐Bayes approach regardless of model identification status, and we recommend quasi‐Bayes for settings where identification is a concern. We further propose weighted average power‐optimal identification‐robust frequentist tests and confidence sets, and prove a Bernstein‐von Mises‐type result for the quasi‐Bayes posterior under weak identification.

We consider estimation in moment condition models and show that under any bound on identification strength, asymptotically admissible (i.e. undominated) estimators in a wide class of estimation problems must be uniformly continuous in the sample moment function. GMM estimators are in general discontinuous in the sample moments, and are thus inadmissible. We show, by contrast, that bagged, or bootstrap aggregated, GMM estimators as well as quasi-Bayes posterior means have superior continuity properties, while results in the literature imply that they are equivalent to GMM when identification is strong. In simulations calibrated to published instrumental variables specifications, we find that these alternatives often outperform GMM.

Economists often estimate models using data from a particular domain, e.g. estimating risk preferences in a particular subject pool or for a specific class of lotteries. Whether a model's predictions extrapolate well across domains depends on whether the estimated model has captured generalizable structure. We provide a tractable formulation for this "out-of-domain" prediction problem and define the transfer error of a model based on how well it performs on data from a new domain. We derive finite-sample forecast intervals that are guaranteed to cover realized transfer errors with a user-selected probability when domains are iid, and use these intervals to compare the transferability of economic models and black box algorithms for predicting certainty equivalents. We find that in this application, the black box algorithms we consider outperform standard economic models when estimated and tested on data from the same domain, but the economic models generalize across domains better than the black-box algorithms do.

Many questions in econometrics can be cast as inference on a parameter selected through optimization. For example, researchers may be interested in the effectiveness of the best policy found in a randomized trial, or the bestperforming investment strategy based on historical data. Such settings give rise to a winner's curse, where conventional estimates are biased and conventional confidence intervals are unreliable. This paper develops optimal confidence sets and median-unbiased estimators that are valid conditional on the parameter selected and so overcome this winner's curse. If one requires validity only on average over target parameters that might have been selected, we develop hybrid procedures that combine conditional and projection confidence sets and offer further performance gains that are attractive relative to existing alternatives.

In an important class of econometric problems, researchers select a target parameter by maximizing the Euclidean norm of a data-dependent vector. Examples that can be cast into this frame include threshold regression models with estimated thresholds and structural break models with estimated breakdates. Estimation and inference procedures that ignore the randomness of the target parameter can be severely biased and misleading when this randomness is non-negligible. This paper studies conditional and unconditional inference in such settings, accounting for the data-dependent choice of target parameters. We detail the construction of quantile-unbiased estimators and confidence sets with correct coverage, and prove their asymptotic validity under data generating process such that the target parameter remains random in the limit. We also provide a novel sample splitting approach that improves on conventional split-sample inference.

We propose a local measure of the relationship between parameter estimates and the moments of the data they depend on. Our measure can be computed at negligible cost even for complex structural models. We argue that reporting this measure can increase the transparency of structural estimates, making it easier for readers to predict the way violations of identifying assumptions would affect the results.When the key assumptions are orthogonality between error terms and excluded instruments, we show that our measure provides a natural extension of the omitted variables bias formula for nonlinear models. We illustrate with applications to published articles in several fields of economics. JEL Codes: C10, C52., National Science Foundation (U.S.)