Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
140 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Estimations of the Local Conditional Tail Average Treatment Effect (2109.08793v3)

Published 18 Sep 2021 in stat.AP and econ.EM

Abstract: The conditional tail average treatment effect (CTATE) is defined as a difference between the conditional tail expectations of potential outcomes, which can capture heterogeneity and deliver aggregated local information on treatment effects over different quantile levels and is closely related to the notion of second-order stochastic dominance and the Lorenz curve. These properties render it a valuable tool for policy evaluation. In this paper, we study estimation of the CTATE locally for a group of compliers (local CTATE or LCTATE) under the two-sided noncompliance framework. We consider a semiparametric treatment effect framework under endogeneity for the LCTATE estimation using a newly introduced class of consistent loss functions jointly for the conditional tail expectation and quantile. We establish the asymptotic theory of our proposed LCTATE estimator and provide an efficient algorithm for its implementation. We then apply the method to evaluate the effects of participating in programs under the Job Training Partnership Act in the US.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (43)
  1. Abadie, A. (2003): “Semiparametric instrumental variable estimation of treatment response models,” Journal of Econometrics, 113, 231–263.
  2. Abadie, A., J. Angrist, and G. Imbens (2002): “Instrumental Variables Estimates of the Effect of Subsidized Training on the Quantiles of Trainee Earnings,” Econometrica, 70, 91–117.
  3. Angrist, J., V. Chernozhukov, and I. Fernández-Val (2006): “Quantile Regression under Misspecification, with an Application to the U.S. Wage Structure,” Econometrica, 74, 539–563.
  4. Angrist, J. D., G. W. Imbens, and D. B. Rubin (1996): “Identification of Causal Effects Using Instrumental Variables,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91, 444–455.
  5. Belloni, A., V. Chernozhukov, I. Fernández-Val, and C. Hansen (2017): “Program Evaluation and Causal Inference With High-Dimensional Data,” Econometrica, 85, 233–298.
  6. Chen, Y.-T., Y.-C. Hsu, and H.-J. Wang (2020): “A Stochastic Frontier Model with Endogenous Treatment Status and Mediator,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 38, 243–256.
  7. Chernozhukov, V. (2005): “Extremal quantile regression,” The Annals of Statistics, 33, 806 – 839.
  8. Chernozhukov, V. and I. Fernández-Val (2011): “Inference for Extremal Conditional Quantile Models, with an Application to Market and Birthweight Risks,” The Review of Economic Studies, 78, 559–589.
  9. Chernozhukov, V., I. Fernández-Val, and B. Melly (2013): “Inference on Counterfactual Distributions,” Econometrica, 81, 2205–2268.
  10. Chernozhukov, V. and C. Hansen (2004): “The Effects of 401(K) Participation on the Wealth Distribution: An Instrumental Quantile Regression Analysis,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 86, 735–751.
  11. ——— (2005): “An IV Model of Quantile Treatment Effects,” Econometrica, 73, 245–261.
  12. ——— (2006): “Instrumental quantile regression inference for structural and treatment effect models,” Journal of Econometrics, 132, 491–525.
  13. ——— (2008): “Instrumental variable quantile regression: A robust inference approach,” Journal of Econometrics, 142, 379–398.
  14. Chernozhukov, V., C. Hansen, and M. Jansson (2007): “Inference approaches for instrumental variable quantile regression,” Economics Letters, 95, 272–277.
  15. ——— (2009): “Finite sample inference for quantile regression models,” Journal of Econometrics, 152, 93–103.
  16. Chou, R. Y., T.-J. Yen, and Y.-M. Yen (2022): “Forecasting Expected Shortfall and Value-at-Risk with the FZ Loss and Realized Variance Measures,” Taiwan Economic Forecast and Policy, 52, 89–140.
  17. Dimitriadis, T. and S. Bayer (2019): “A joint quantile and expected shortfall regression framework,” Electron. J. Statist., 13, 1823–1871.
  18. Donald, S. G., Y.-C. Hsu, and R. P. Lieli (2014): “Testing the Unconfoundedness Assumption via Inverse Probability Weighted Estimators of (L)ATT,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 32, 395–415.
  19. Engle, R. F. and S. Manganelli (2004): “CAViaR: Conditional Autoregressive Value at Risk by Regression Quantiles,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 22, 367–381.
  20. Fissler, T. and J. F. Ziegel (2016): “Higher order elicitability and Osband’s principle,” The Annals of Statistics, 44, 1680–1707.
  21. Fricke, H., M. Frölich, M. Huber, and M. Lechner (2020): “Endogeneity and non-response bias in treatment evaluation – nonparametric identification of causal effects by instruments,” Journal of Applied Econometrics, 35, 481–504.
  22. Frölich, M. and M. Huber (2017): “Direct and indirect treatment effects–causal chains and mediation analysis with instrumental variables,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 79, 1645–1666.
  23. Frölich, M. and B. Melly (2013): “Unconditional Quantile Treatment Effects Under Endogeneity,” Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 31, 346–357.
  24. Hahn, J. and Z. Liao (2021): “Bootstrap Standard Error Estimates and Inference,” Econometrica, 89, 1963–1977.
  25. Heckman, J. J., J. Smith, and N. Clements (1997): “Making The Most Out Of Programme Evaluations and Social Experiments: Accounting For Heterogeneity in Programme Impacts,” The Review of Economic Studies, 64, 487–535.
  26. Hill, J. B. (2015): “Expected Shortfall Estimation and Gaussian Inference for Infinite Variance Time Series,” Journal of Financial Econometrics, 13, 1–44.
  27. Hsu, Y.-C., T.-C. Lai, and R. P. Lieli (2022): “Estimation and inference for distribution and quantile functions in endogenous treatment effect models,” Econometric Reviews, 41, 22–50.
  28. Imbens, G. and J. Angrist (1994): “Identification and Estimation of Local Average Treatment Effects,” Econometrica, 62, 467–75.
  29. Koenker, R. and G. Bassett (1978): “Regression Quantiles,” Econometrica, 46, 33–50.
  30. Lei, L., R. Sahoo, and S. Wager (2023): “Policy Learning under Biased Sample Selection,” arXiv working paper, 2304.11735.
  31. Linton, O. and Z. Xiao (2013): “Estimation of and Inference about the expected shortfall for time series with infinite variance,” Econometric Theory, 29, 771–807.
  32. Luo, Y. and Y. Wan (2018): “Integrated-Quantile-Based Estimation for First-Price Auction Models,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 36, 173–180.
  33. Melly, B. and K. Wüthrich (2017): “Local quantile treatment effects,” Handbook of quantile regression, 145–164.
  34. Meng, X. and J. W. Taylor (2020): “Estimating Value-at-Risk and Expected Shortfall using the intraday low and range data,” European Journal of Operational Research, 280, 191 – 202.
  35. Newey, W. K. (1991): “Uniform Convergence in Probability and Stochastic Equicontinuity,” Econometrica, 59, 1161–1167.
  36. ——— (1997): “Convergence rates and asymptotic normality for series estimators,” Journal of Econometrics, 79, 147 – 168.
  37. Newey, W. K. and D. McFadden (1994): “Chapter 36: Large sample estimation and hypothesis testing,” in Handbook of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 4, 2111–2245.
  38. Patton, A. J., J. F. Ziegel, and R. Chen (2019): “Dynamic semiparametric models for expected shortfall (and Value-at-Risk),” Journal of Econometrics, 211, 388 – 413.
  39. Powell, J. L. (1984): “Least absolute deviations estimation for the censored regression model,” Journal of Econometrics, 25, 303–325.
  40. Taylor, J. W. (2019): “Forecasting Value at Risk and Expected Shortfall Using a Semiparametric Approach Based on the Asymmetric Laplace Distribution,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 37, 121–133.
  41. Wei, B., L. Peng, M.-J. Zhang, and J. P. Fine (2021): “Estimation of causal quantile effects with a binary instrumental variable and censored data,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 83, 559–578.
  42. Wei, B., K. M. Tan, and X. He (2024): “Estimation of complier expected shortfall treatment effects with a binary instrumental variable,” Journal of Econometrics, 238, 105572.
  43. Wüthrich, K. (2020): “A Comparison of Two Quantile Models With Endogeneity,” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 38, 443–456.
Citations (1)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets