search for: poolabl

Displaying 9 results from an estimated 9 matches for "poolabl".

Did you mean: foolable
2010 Jul 01
0
coefficients poolability (was: question regarding panel data analysis)
Hello. Not an easy question at all, and it has little to do with software, alas! Veeeeeery loosely speaking: if the homogeneity hypothesis is rejected, then, depending on data availability, you may still be able to treat the data like a panel by: a) ignoring the results of the poolability test b) allowing the coefficients to vary. Of course, a) requires some courage while b) requires more
2011 Jan 09
1
question about the chow test of poolability
Good day R-listers, My question is more a statistical question than an R related question, so please bear with me i'm currently applying the chow test of poolability in fact i'm working with panel N=17 T=5 , and my model looks like this : Yit= a0+B1X1+B2X2+B3X3+B4X4+eit My question is the following when i'm Testing for the equality of the coefficients of the unpooled data (the
2010 Dec 06
1
waldtest and nested models - poolability (parameter stability)
Dear All, I'm trying to use waldtest to test poolability (parameter stability) between two logistic regressions. Because I need to use robust standard errors (using sandwich), I cannot use anova. anova has no problems running the test, but waldtest does, indipendently of specifying vcov or not. waldtest does not appear to see that my models are nested. H0 in my case is the the vector of
2009 Dec 10
0
plm ? tests of poolability ? error: insufficient number
Hello Cecilia, nice hearing from you again. I must restate a couple of my old hints, though ;^) 1) please always put the authors c/c, as we are not guaranteed to browse through the r-help every day 2) please provide reproducible examples. As example(pooltest) keeps working fine, as do some other cases I tried (Grunfeld data etc.), I don't know what the problem is but evidently your data are
2009 Dec 10
0
plm – tests of poolability – error: insufficient number of observations
Hi everyone! I?m running the pooltest in plm package, like this pooltest(cstfin12~lmaccdiscrz+lcobjur+lliq+lcollateral+ldimensao, data = dados3, model = "within") But I got the following error: Error in FUN(X[[1L]], ...) : insufficient number of observations My data is an unbalanced panel with 20907 observations (6971 individuals and years 2001 to 2007). This is not enough?
2010 Jul 01
3
question regarding panel data analysis
Good day R-users, So if the question may seem easy to many of you but this present a serious issue for me . I'm currently running a panel data analysis i've used the plm package to perform the Tests of poolability as results intercepts and coefficients are assumed different. so my question is should give up the panel analysis in my case or is there any alternative methodology or
2010 Feb 25
2
error using pvcm() on unbalanced panel data
Dear all I am trying to fit Variable Coefficients Models on Unbalanced Panel Data. I managed to fit such models on balanced panel data (the example from the "plm" vignette), but I failed to do so on my real, unbalanced panel data. I can reproduce the error on a modified example from the vignette: > require(plm) > data("Hedonic") > Hed <- pvcm(mv ~ crim + zn + indus
2010 Nov 18
1
how do I build panel data/longitudinal data models with AR terms using the plm package or any other package
Hi All, I am doing econometric modeling of panel data (fixed effects). We currently use Eviews to do this, but I have discovered a bug in Eviews 7 and am exploring the use of R to build panel data models / longitudinal data models. I looked at the plm package but do not see how I can incorporate AR terms in the model using the plm package. I have an Eviews model with two AR terms, AR(1) and
2007 Feb 24
1
Woolf's test, Odds ratio, stratification
Just a general question concerning the woolf test (package vcd), when we have stratified data (2x2 tables) and when the p.value of the woolf-test is below 0.05 then we assume that there is a heterogeneity and a common odds ratio cannot be computed? Does this mean that we have to try to add more stratification variables (stratify more) to make the woolf-test p.value insignificant? Also in the