Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/fedmsr/170.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Alternative computational approaches to inference in the multinomial probit model

Author

Listed:
  • John Geweke
  • Michael P. Keane
  • David E. Runkle
Abstract
This research compares several approaches to inference in the multinomial probit model, based on Monte-Carlo results for a seven choice model. The experiment compares the simulated maximum likelihood estimator using the GHK recursive probability simulator, the method of simulated moments estimator using the GHK recursive simulator and kernel-smoothed frequency simulators, and posterior means using a Gibbs sampling-data augmentation algorithm. Each estimator is applied in nine different models, which have from 1 to 40 free parameters. The performance of all estimators is found to be satisfactory. However, the results indicate that the method of simulated moments estimator with the kernel-smoothed frequency simulator does not perform quite as well as the other three methods. Among those three, the Gibbs sampling-data augmentation algorithm appears to have a slight overall edge, with the relative performance of MSM and SML based on the GHK simulator difficult to determine.

Suggested Citation

  • John Geweke & Michael P. Keane & David E. Runkle, 1994. "Alternative computational approaches to inference in the multinomial probit model," Staff Report 170, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedmsr:170
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/common/pub_detail.cfm?pb_autonum_id=451
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://minneapolisfed.org/research/sr/sr170.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dansie, B. R., 1985. "Parameter estimability in the multinomial probit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 526-528, December.
    2. McFadden, Daniel, 1989. "A Method of Simulated Moments for Estimation of Discrete Response Models without Numerical Integration," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 995-1026, September.
    3. Borsch-Supan, Axel & Hajivassiliou, Vassilis A., 1993. "Smooth unbiased multivariate probability simulators for maximum likelihood estimation of limited dependent variable models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 347-368, August.
    4. Bunch, David S., 1991. "Estimability in the Multinomial Probit Model," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt1gf1t128, University of California Transportation Center.
    5. Geweke, John, 1986. "Exact Inference in the Inequality Constrained Normal Linear Regression Model," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 1(2), pages 127-141, April.
    6. Geweke, John, 1988. "Antithetic acceleration of Monte Carlo integration in Bayesian inference," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 38(1-2), pages 73-89.
    7. Geweke, John F. & Keane, Michael P. & Runkle, David E., 1997. "Statistical inference in the multinomial multiperiod probit model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 125-165, September.
    8. Geweke, J, 1993. "Bayesian Treatment of the Independent Student- t Linear Model," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(S), pages 19-40, Suppl. De.
    9. McFadden, Daniel & Ruud, Paul A, 1994. "Estimation by Simulation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(4), pages 591-608, November.
    10. Vassilis Argyrou Hajivassiliou, 1993. "Simulating Normal Rectangle Probabilities and Their Derivatives: The Effects of Vectorization," Working Papers _025, Yale University.
    11. Pakes, Ariel & Pollard, David, 1989. "Simulation and the Asymptotics of Optimization Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 1027-1057, September.
    12. Keane, Michael P, 1992. "A Note on Identification in the Multinomial Probit Model," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 10(2), pages 193-200, April.
    13. Lee, L.F., 1992. "Asymptotic Bias in Maximum Simulated Likelihood Estimation of Discrete Choice Models," Papers 93-03, Michigan - Center for Research on Economic & Social Theory.
    14. Elrod, Terry & Keane, Michael, 1995. "A Factor-Analytic Probit Model for Representing the Market Structure in Panel Data," MPRA Paper 52434, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Bunch, David S., 1991. "Estimability in the multinomial probit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-12, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniel Ackerberg, 2009. "A new use of importance sampling to reduce computational burden in simulation estimation," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 343-376, December.
    2. Ziegler Andreas, 2010. "Z-Tests in Multinomial Probit Models under Simulated Maximum Likelihood Estimation: Some Small Sample Properties," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 230(5), pages 630-652, October.
    3. Horowitz, Joel & Keane, Michael & Bolduc, Denis & Divakar, Suresh & Geweke, John & Gonul, Fosun & Hajivassiliou, Vassilis & Koppelman, Frank & Matzkin, Rosa & Rossi, Peter & Ruud, Paul, 1994. "Advances in Random Utility Models," MPRA Paper 53026, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Ziegler, Andreas, 2001. "Simulated z-tests in multinomial probit models," ZEW Discussion Papers 01-53, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Rennings, Klaus & Ziegler, Andreas & Zwick, Thomas, 2001. "Employment changes in environmentally innovative firms," ZEW Discussion Papers 01-46, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    6. GRAMMIG, Joachim & HUJER, Reinhard & SCHEIDLER, Michael, 2001. "The econometrics of airline network management," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2001055, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    7. Ziegler, Andreas, 2012. "Individual characteristics and stated preferences for alternative energy sources and propulsion technologies in vehicles: A discrete choice analysis for Germany," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1372-1385.
    8. Rinus Haaijer & Michel Wedel & Marco Vriens & Tom Wansbeek, 1998. "Utility Covariances and Context Effects in Conjoint MNP Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 236-252.
    9. Klaus Rennings & Andreas Ziegler & Thomas Zwick, 2004. "The effect of environmental innovations on employment changes: an econometric analysis," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(6), pages 374-387, November.
    10. Karthik K. Srinivasan & Hani S. Mahmassani, 2005. "A Dynamic Kernel Logit Model for the Analysis of Longitudinal Discrete Choice Data: Properties and Computational Assessment," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(2), pages 160-181, May.
    11. McCulloch, Robert E. & Polson, Nicholas G. & Rossi, Peter E., 2000. "A Bayesian analysis of the multinomial probit model with fully identified parameters," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 173-193, November.
    12. Haaijer, Marinus E., 1996. "Predictions in conjoint choice experiments : the x-factor probit model," Research Report 96B22, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    13. Hajivassiliou, Vassilis A. & Ruud, Paul A., 1986. "Classical estimation methods for LDV models using simulation," Handbook of Econometrics, in: R. F. Engle & D. McFadden (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 40, pages 2383-2441, Elsevier.
    14. Friederike Paetz & Winfried J. Steiner, 2017. "The benefits of incorporating utility dependencies in finite mixture probit models," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 39(3), pages 793-819, July.
    15. Paul Gertler & Roland Sturm & Bruce Davidson, 1994. "Information and the Demand for Supplemental Medicare Insurance," NBER Working Papers 4700, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Lee, Lung-Fei, 1997. "Simulated maximum likelihood estimation of dynamic discrete choice statistical models some Monte Carlo results," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 1-35.
    17. Donald Boyd & Hamilton Lankford & Susanna Loeb & James Wyckoff, 2013. "Analyzing the Determinants of the Matching of Public School Teachers to Jobs: Disentangling the Preferences of Teachers and Employers," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 83-117.
    18. Victoria Prowse, 2012. "Modeling Employment Dynamics With State Dependence and Unobserved Heterogeneity," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(3), pages 411-431, April.
    19. Vijverberg, Wim P. M., 1997. "Monte Carlo evaluation of multivariate normal probabilities," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1-2), pages 281-307.
    20. Rendtel, Ulrich & Kaltenborn, Ulrich, 2004. "The stability of simulation based estimation of the multiperiod multinominal probit model with individual specific covariates," Discussion Papers 2004/5, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Econometric models;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fip:fedmsr:170. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kate Hansel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cfrbmus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.