02-29-2024
bbridgerb
SAS Employee
Member since
04-11-2013
- 8 Posts
- 0 Likes Given
- 1 Solutions
- 6 Likes Received
-
Latest posts by bbridgerb
Subject Views Posted 1574 01-25-2018 09:30 AM 3189 11-15-2016 01:25 PM 2376 08-08-2016 11:51 AM 1881 08-08-2016 11:14 AM 3083 07-29-2016 01:47 PM 1913 07-26-2016 03:23 PM 3617 06-07-2016 11:14 AM 1352 04-14-2014 03:00 PM -
Activity Feed for bbridgerb
- Got a Like for Re: Big difference between actual and predicted values in GMM Estimation. 01-25-2018 12:21 PM
- Posted Re: Big difference between actual and predicted values in GMM Estimation on SAS Forecasting and Econometrics. 01-25-2018 09:30 AM
- Posted Re: GMM using Proc Panel on SAS Forecasting and Econometrics. 11-15-2016 01:25 PM
- Got a Like for Re: Run cross validation for an autoregressive model. 08-08-2016 03:07 PM
- Posted Re: Run cross validation for an autoregressive model on SAS Forecasting and Econometrics. 08-08-2016 11:51 AM
- Posted Re: Questions related to panel analysis on SAS Forecasting and Econometrics. 08-08-2016 11:14 AM
- Got a Like for Re: Run cross validation for an autoregressive model. 07-29-2016 03:51 PM
- Posted Re: Run cross validation for an autoregressive model on SAS Forecasting and Econometrics. 07-29-2016 01:47 PM
- Posted Re: Questions related to panel analysis on SAS Forecasting and Econometrics. 07-26-2016 03:23 PM
- Got a Like for Re: How can I compute Hodrick 1992 (IB) standard error and two-sides p value?. 06-16-2016 11:37 AM
- Posted Re: How can I compute Hodrick 1992 (IB) standard error and two-sides p value? on SAS Forecasting and Econometrics. 06-07-2016 11:14 AM
- Got a Like for Re: SAS vs. STATA xtgls equivalent. 04-14-2014 07:05 PM
- Posted Re: SAS vs. STATA xtgls equivalent on SAS Forecasting and Econometrics. 04-14-2014 03:00 PM
-
My Liked Posts
Subject Likes Posted 1 01-25-2018 09:30 AM 1 08-08-2016 11:51 AM 1 07-29-2016 01:47 PM 2 06-07-2016 11:14 AM 1 04-14-2014 03:00 PM
01-25-2018
09:30 AM
1 Like
Hello,
I run your model using the sample data you provided. Here are few suggestions that you might want to try.
1. FIXTWO option has no impact on estimating the GMM model. Basically it just estimates FIXTWO model in addition to GMM one.
2. DEPVAR(LEVEL) and NOLEVELS options are conflicting. DEPVAR(LEVAL) says to use levels as instruments while NOLEVELS is saying to ignore it. In the end NOLEVELS is ignored and it estimates the model with levels as instruments only.
3. Is this the correct model you want to estimate with levels as instruments only? You might want to use differenced equations too. See the DEPVAR option in SAS/ETS documentation.
4. The first step is estimable (see this by removing TWOSTEP option) but using your sample data there is a problem with residuals. Is this model parametrized correctly?
5. Using the sample data the model fit is pretty bad (t-values close to zero). Likely that this parametrization is causing problems in 4.
Jan
... View more
11-15-2016
01:25 PM
Yes, several options control lags/leads in the instrument matrix.
tha MAXBAND= options specifies the maximum number of time periods (per instrumental variable) that are allowed into the moment condition. This is the case for dependant and independent variables. In order to fully understand how these moment conditions are created you might also interested in checking the BANDOPT option.
BANDOPT=CENTERED | LEADING | TRAILING specifies which observations are included in the instrument list when the MAXBAND= option is specified. You can specify the following values: CENTERED uses both leading and trailing observations. LEADING uses only leading observations. TRAILING uses only trailing observations.
... View more
08-08-2016
11:51 AM
1 Like
In a data step you need to subsample the data to create the fitting (training) and validation subsamples. In your case you would repeat this process ten times to get random subsamples. The training subsample will be used to fit the model while the validation one will be used to validate it. You can assemble a similar table to the one from GLMSELECT using the AUTOREG results. I am not sure what kind of cross validation you would like to do but you can use the OUTPUT statement in the AUTOREG procedure to get predicted values used in the calculation. You would likely have to append the validation data to the training dataset with the dependent variable missing (trick to exclude these from the estimation but get predictions for them) to get predicted values for them.
... View more
08-08-2016
11:14 AM
Your test is rejecting the null which means that the errors are either serially correlated or/and the cross sectional effects are not independent. Parks method might not be needed but you might want to fit an AR/MA model. For discussion of these models see for example Baltagi, "Econometric Analysis of Panel Data". Unfurtunatelly, aside from dynamic panel estimator, Parks and Dasilva, the PANEL procedure doesn't accomodate these models. You might be able to fit some of them in the SSM procedure.
... View more
07-29-2016
01:47 PM
1 Like
The AUTOREG procedure cannot do the cross validation directly. If you wanted to crossvalidate the way GLMSELECT does you would have to split up the sample and invoke PROC AUTOREG multiple times. The AR terms would be handled just like any non autoregressive parameters in the model.
... View more
07-26-2016
03:23 PM
The Parks method might be a good choice but it really depends on diagnostics and assumptions behing your model. It is a good idea to test first if the errors are autocorrelated. The PANEL procedure offers several tests. Durbin-Watson BFN or Baltagi and Li's tests might be a good start. I would try to run several tests and figure out what type of correlation I have because it determines what type of model I might want to fit. If the errors are autocorrelated, the modeling possibilities range from differencing the data, Arellano and Bond's dynamic panel estimators or Park's method. The Park's model is typically used if you want to include a structure for contemporaneous correlation between cross sections with possible heteroscedasticity on top of autocorrelated errors.
If the panel is nonstationary you might want to difference the data. DaSilva is an MA type of estimator that doesn't help with this problem.
Hadri's test: Under the null data is stationary. Your test rejects the null and therefore the panel is nonstationary.
CD test: Under the null the residuals are not correlated. Your p-value is pretty high indicating that the null cannot be rejected. There is no contemporaneous correlation between cross sections which somewhat suggests that the Parks model might not be needed.
... View more
06-07-2016
11:14 AM
2 Likes
Hello,
reading the paper I believe we don't have a direct implementation of this method in SAS. You can, however, use the AUTOREG or REG procedures to run OLS, get the residuals with the OUTPUT statement and calculate standard errors (equation 😎 in IML. Since the assymptotic distribution of the parameter estimates follows the normal distribution, large sample p-values for the two sided test are also easy to obtain in IML. The paper also suggests that the small sample empirical distribution is different from the assymptotic distribution and therefore if the sample is small the p-values might need to be obtain from a monte carlo simulation.
Thank you for posting,
Jan
... View more
04-14-2014
03:00 PM
1 Like
Depending on the model you are trying to estimate you might be able to find it in SAS/ETS. Below is a link to the SAS/ETS documentation: http://support.sas.com/documentation/cdl/en/etsug/66840/PDF/default/etsug.pdf See the PANEL procedure for one way and two way random effect models and the Parks method. MODEL and SYSLIN procedures could be also helpful.
... View more