------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Underidentification test (Kleibergen-Paap rk LM statistic): 6.563
Chi-sq(1) P-val = 0.0104
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weak identification test (Cragg-Donald Wald F statistic): 26.613
(Kleibergen-Paap rk Wald F statistic): 4.443
Stock-Yogo weak ID test critical values: 10% maximal IV size 16.38
15% maximal IV size 8.96
20% maximal IV size 6.66
25% maximal IV size 5.53
Source: Stock-Yogo (2005).Reproduced by permission.
NB: Critical values are for Cragg-Donald F statistic and i.i.d. errors.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hansen J statistic (overidentification test of all instruments): 0.000
(equation exactly identified)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instrumented: z_x
Included instruments: z_z z_z2 z_z3 z_z4 _Itime_2013 _Itime_2014 _Itime_2015
_Itime_2016 _Itime_2017 _Itime_2018 _Itime_2019
Excluded instruments: z_x_1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------


以上是我回归分析的结果，不太清楚是否通过弱工具变量检验，查阅了好多帖子，有说Cragg-Donald Wald F statistic越大越好，越能说明不存在弱工具问题，也有说这个值不能太大。。。孩子太无助了，求助好心人解答。
另外，在陈强老师的书中是这么写的：“上表弱工具变量检验的Cragg-Donald Wald F 统计量显示，对于名义显著性水平为5%的检验，其真实显著性水平不会超过15%。”这个表中的Cragg-Donald Wald F值=14.906，位于10%maximal IV size和15%maximal IV size之间，这个例子的多个弱工具检验结果都是拒绝弱工具变量的。
那我的Cragg-Donald Wald F值=26.613，到底说明了啥呢？

另外，Stock-Yogo weak ID test critical values 到底怎么看，意味着什么呢？