在系统GMM中，instruments的数量大于groups的数量，怎么办啊

是 否 +2 论坛币

k人 参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群

赵安豆老师微信：zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

立即领取

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币！

+2 论坛币

我在做系统GMM时，分析Number of groups <Number of instruments ，怎么办啊？
并且工具变量怎么选择呢？外生变量，l.前定变量，l2内生变量，都可以，关键是选择谁啊？工具变量不同分析的结果又很大不同，包括显著度。急！！！请高手解答

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

分享0 收藏0 回帖

关键词：Instruments Instrument Groups 系统GMM Group groups

Since in the standard, un-collapsed form each instrumenting variable generates one column for each time
period and lag available to that time period, the number of instruments is quadratic in T. To limit the
instrument count (c.f. subsection 2.6), one can restrict the lag ranges used in generating these instrument
sets. Or one can collapse them; this is non-standard but available in xtabond2.9

In addition, a large instrument collection can overfit endogenous variables. For intuition, consider that in
2SLS, if the number of instruments equals the number of observations, the R2’s of the first-stage regressions
are 1 and the second-stage results match those of (biased) OLS.
Unfortunately, there appears to be little guidance from the literature on how many instruments is “too
many” (Ruud 2000, p. 515), in part because the bias is present to some extent even when instruments are
few. In one simulation of difference GMM on an 8 × 100 panel, Windmeijer (2005) reports that cutting
the instrument count from 28 to 13 reduced the average bias in the two-step estimate of the parameter of
interest by 40%. On the other hand, the average parameter estimate only rose from 0.9810 to 0.9866, against
a true value of 1.000.

我没看懂！

呵呵呵

我也没看懂，继续请教高手！！！

再顶！！期待有人指点！

请问如何解决的呢？