In this paper, we propose an instrumental variable approach to constructing confidence sets (CS’s) for the true parameter in models defined by conditional moment inequalities/equalities. We show that by properly choosing instrument functions, one can transform conditional moment inequalities/equalities into unconditional ones without losing identification power. Based on the unconditional moment inequalities/equalities, we construct CS’s by inverting Cramér-von Mises-type or Kolmogorov-Smirnov-type tests. Critical values are obtained using generalized moment selection (GMS) procedures.
We show that the proposed CS’s have correct uniform asymptotic coverage probabilities. New methods are required to establish these results because an infinite-dimensional nuisance parameter affects the asymptotic distributions. We show that the tests considered are consistent against all fixed alternatives and typically have power against n-1/2-local alternatives to some, but not all, sequences of distributions in the null hypothesis. Monte Carlo simulations for five different models show that the methods perform well in finite samples.
This paper is concerned with tests and confidence intervals for parameters that are not necessarily identified and are defined by moment inequalities. In the literature, different test statistics, critical value methods, and implementation methods (i.e., the asymptotic distribution versus the bootstrap) have been proposed. In this paper, we compare these methods. We provide a recommended test statistic, moment selection critical value method, and implementation method. We provide data-dependent procedures for choosing the key moment selection tuning parameter kappa and a size-correction factor eta.
This paper analyzes the finite-sample and asymptotic properties of several bootstrap and m out of n bootstrap methods for constructing confidence interval (CI) endpoints in models defined by moment inequalities. In particular, we consider using these methods directly to construct CI endpoints. By considering two very simple models, the paper shows that neither the bootstrap nor the m out of n bootstrap is valid in finite samples or in a uniform asymptotic sense in general when applied directly to construct CI endpoints.
In contrast, other results in the literature show that other ways of applying the bootstrap, m out of n bootstrap, and subsampling do lead to uniformly asymptotically valid confidence sets in moment inequality models. Thus, the uniform asymptotic validity of resampling methods in moment inequality models depends on the way in which the resampling methods are employed.
This paper considers a first-order autoregressive model with conditionally heteroskedastic innovations. The asymptotic distributions of least squares (LS), infeasible generalized least squares (GLS), and feasible GLS estimators and t statistics are determined. The GLS procedures allow for misspecification of the form of the conditional heteroskedasticity and, hence, are referred to as quasi-GLS procedures. The asymptotic results are established for drifting sequences of the autoregressive parameter and the distribution of the time series of innovations. In particular, we consider the full range of cases in which the autoregressive parameter ρn satisfies (i) n(1 - ρn) → ∞ and (ii) n(1 - ρn) approaches h1 in [0, ∞) as n → ∞, where n is the sample size. Results of this type are needed to establish the uniform asymptotic properties of the LS and quasi-GLS statistics.
This paper considers a first-order autoregressive model with conditionally heteroskedastic innovations. The asymptotic distributions of least squares (LS), infeasible generalized least squares (GLS), and feasible GLS estimators and t statistics are determined. The GLS procedures allow for misspecification of the form of the conditional heteroskedasticity and, hence, are referred to as quasi-GLS procedures. The asymptotic results are established for drifting sequences of the autoregressive parameter and the distribution of the time series of innovations. In particular, we consider the full range of cases in which the autoregressive parameter rhon satisfies (i) n(1 – ρn) → ∞ and (ii) n(1 – ρn) approaching h in [0,∞) as n → ∞, where n is the sample size. Results of this type are needed to establish the uniform asymptotic properties of the LS and quasi-GLS statistics.
The topic of this paper is inference in models in which parameters are defined by moment inequalities and/or equalities. The parameters may or may not be identified. This paper introduces a new class of confidence sets and tests based on generalized moment selection (GMS). GMS procedures are shown to have correct asymptotic size in a uniform sense and are shown not to be asymptotically conservative.
The power of GMS tests is compared to that of subsampling, m out of n bootstrap, and “plug-in asymptotic” (PA) tests. The latter three procedures are the only general procedures in the literature that have been shown to have correct asymptotic size in a uniform sense for the moment inequality/equality model. GMS tests are shown to have asymptotic power that dominates that of subsampling, m out of n bootstrap, and PA tests. Subsampling and m out of n bootstrap tests are shown to have asymptotic power that dominates that of PA tests.
This paper analyzes the properties of subsampling, hybrid subsampling, and size-correction methods in two non-regular models. The latter two procedures are introduced in Andrews and Guggenberger (2005b). The models are non-regular in the sense that the test statistics of interest exhibit a discontinuity in their limit distribution as a function of a parameter in the model. The first model is a linear instrumental variables (IV) model with possibly weak IVs estimated using two-stage least squares (2SLS). In this case, the discontinuity occurs when the concentration parameter is zero. The second model is a linear regression model in which the parameter of interest may be near a boundary. In this case, the discontinuity occurs when the parameter is on the boundary.
The paper shows that in the IV model one-sided and equal-tailed two-sided subsampling tests and confidence intervals (CIs) based on the 2SLS t statistic do not have correct asymptotic size. This holds for both fully- and partially-studentized t statistics. But, subsampling procedures based on the partially-studentized t statistic can be size-corrected. On the other hand, symmetric two-sided subsampling tests and CIs are shown to have (essentially) correct asymptotic size when based on a partially-studentized t statistic.
Furthermore, all types of hybrid subsampling tests and CIs are shown to have correct asymptotic size in this model. The above results are consistent with “impossibility” results of Dufour (1997) because subsampling and hybrid subsampling CIs are shown to have infinite length with positive probability.
Subsampling CIs for a parameter that may be near a lower boundary are shown to have incorrect asymptotic size for upper one-sided and equal-tailed and symmetric two-sided CIs. Again, size-correction is possible. In this model as well, all types of hybrid subsampling CIs are found to have correct asymptotic size.
This paper considers inference based on a test statistic that has a limit distribution that is discontinuous in a nuisance parameter or the parameter of interest. The paper shows that subsample, bn < n bootstrap, and standard fixed critical value tests based on such a test statistic often have asymptotic size — defined as the limit of the finite-sample size — that is greater than the nominal level of the tests. We determine precisely the asymptotic size of such tests under a general set of high-level conditions that are relatively easy to verify. The high-level conditions are verified in several examples. Analogous results are established for confidence intervals.
The results apply to tests and confidence intervals (i) when a parameter may be near a boundary, (ii) for parameters defined by moment inequalities, (iii) based on super-efficient or shrinkage estimators, (iv) based on post-model selection estimators, (v) in scalar and vector autoregressive models with roots that may be close to unity, (vi) in models with lack of identification at some point(s) in the parameter space, such as models with weak instruments and threshold autoregressive models, (vii) in predictive regression models with nearly-integrated regressors, (viii) for non-differentiable functions of parameters, and (ix) for differentiable functions of parameters that have zero first-order derivative.
Examples (i)-(iii) are treated in this paper. Examples (i) and (iv)-(vi) are treated in sequels to this paper, Andrews and Guggenberger (2005a, b). In models with unidentified parameters that are bounded by moment inequalities, i.e., example (ii), certain subsample confidence regions are shown to have asymptotic size equal to their nominal level. In all other examples listed above, some types of subsample procedures do not have asymptotic size equal to their nominal level.
Keywords: Asymptotic size, b < n bootstrap, Finite-sample size, Over-rejection, Size correction, Subsample confidence interval, Subsample test
This paper considers the problem of constructing tests and confidence intervals (CIs) that have correct asymptotic size in a broad class of non-regular models. The models considered are non-regular in the sense that standard test statistics have asymptotic distributions that are discontinuous in some parameters. It is shown in Andrews and Guggenberger (2005a) that standard fixed critical value, subsample, and b < n bootstrap methods often have incorrect size in such models. This paper introduces general methods of constructing tests and CIs that have correct size. First, procedures are introduced that are a hybrid of subsample and fixed critical value methods. The resulting hybrid procedures are easy to compute and have correct size asymptotically in many, but not all, cases of interest. Second, the paper introduces size-correction and “plug-in” size-correction methods for fixed critical value, subsample, and hybrid tests. The paper also introduces finite-sample adjustments to the asymptotic results of Andrews and Guggenberger (2005a) for subsample and hybrid methods and employs these adjustments in size-correction.
The paper discusses several examples in detail. The examples are: (i) tests when a nuisance parameter may be near a boundary, (ii) CIs in an autoregressive model with a root that may be close to unity, and (iii) tests and CIs based on a post-conservative model selection estimator.
Keywords: Asymptotic size, Autoregressive model, b < n bootstrap, Finite-sample size, Hybrid test, Model selection, Over-rejection, Parameter near boundary, Size correction, Subsample confidence interval, Subsample test
This paper considers a mean zero stationary first-order autoregressive (AR) model. It is shown that the least squares estimator and t statistic have Cauchy and standard normal asymptotic distributions, respectively, when the AR parameter ρn is very near to one in the sense that 1 – ρn = (n–1).
Keywords: Asymptotics, Least squares, Nearly nonstationary, Stationary initial condition, Unit root
This paper considers tests in an instrumental variables (IVs) regression model with IVs that may be weak. Tests that have near-optimal asymptotic power properties with Gaussian errors for weak and strong IVs have been determined in Andrews, Moreira, and Stock (2006a). In this paper, we seek tests that have near-optimal asymptotic power with Gaussian errors and improved power with non-Gaussian errors relative to existing tests.
Tests with such properties are obtained by introducing rank tests that are analogous to the conditional likelihood ratio test of Moreira (2003). We also introduce a rank test that is analogous to the Lagrange multiplier test of Kleibergen (2002) and Moreira (2001).
Keywords: Asymptotically similar tests, Conditional likelihood ratio test, Instrumental variables regression, Lagrange multiplier test, Power of test, Rank tests, Thick-tailed distribution, Weak instruments
This paper reviews recent developments in methods for dealing with weak instruments (IVs) in IV regression models. The focus is more on tests (and confidence intervals derived from tests) than estimators.
The paper also presents new testing results under “many weak IV asymptotics,” which are relevant when the number of IVs is large and the coefficients on the IVs are relatively small. Asymptotic power envelopes for invariant tests are established. Power comparisons of the conditional likelihood ratio (CLR), Anderson-Rubin, and Lagrange multiplier tests are made. Numerical results show that the CLR test is on the asymptotic power envelope. This holds no matter what the relative magnitude of the IV strength to the number of IVs.
Keywords: Conditional likelihood ratio test, Instrumental variables, Many instrumental variables, Power envelope, Weak instruments
This paper introduces a rank-based test for the instrumental variables regression model that dominates the Anderson-Rubin test in terms of finite sample size and asymptotic power in certain circumstances. The test has correct size for any distribution of the errors with weak or strong instruments. The test has noticeably higher power than the Anderson-Rubin test when the error distribution has thick tails and comparable power otherwise. Like the Anderson-Rubin test, the rank tests considered here perform best, relative to other available tests, in exactly-identified models.
This paper considers tests of the parameter on endogenous variables in an instrumental variables regression model. The focus is on determining tests that have some optimal power properties. We start by considering a model with normally distributed errors and known error covariance matrix. We consider tests that are similar and satisfy a natural rotational invariance condition. We determine tests that maximize weighted average power (WAP) for arbitrary weight functions among invariant similar tests. Such tests include point optimal (PO) invariant similar tests.
The results yield the power envelope for invariant similar tests. This allows one to assess and compare the power properties of existing tests, such as the Anderson-Rubin, Lagrange multiplier (LM), and conditional likelihood ratio (CLR) tests, and new optimal WAP and PO invariant similar tests. We find that the CLR test is quite close to being uniformly most powerful invariant among a class of two-sided tests. A new unconditional test, P*, also is found to have this property. For one-sided alternatives, no test achieves the invariant power envelope, but a new test — the one-sided CLR test — is found to be fairly close.
The finite sample results of the paper are extended to the case of unknown error covariance matrix and possibly non-normal errors via weak instrument asymptotics. Strong instrument asymptotic results also are provided because we seek tests that perform well under both weak and strong instruments.
Keywords: Instrumental variables regression, invariant tests, optimal tests, similar tests, weak instruments, weighted average power