Paper detail

Consistency of M estimates for separable nonlinear regression models

Consider a nonlinear regression model : y_{i}=g(x_{i},θ)+e_{i}, i=1,...,n, where the x_{i} are random predictors x_{i} and θ is the unknown parameter vector ranging in a set Θ\subsetR^{p}. All known results on the consistency of the least squares estimator and in general of M estimators assume that either Θ is compact or g is bounded, which excludes frequently employed models such as the Michaelis-Menten, logistic growth and exponential decay models. In this article we deal with the so-called separable models, where p=p_{1}+p_{2}, θ=(α,β) with α\inA\subsetR^{p_{1}}, β\inB\subsetR^{p_{2},}and g has the form g(x,θ)=β^{T}h(x,α) where h is a function with values in R^{p_{2}}. We prove the strong consistency of M estimators under very general assumptions, assuming that h is a bounded function of α, which includes the three models mentioned above. Key words and phrases: Nonlinear regression, separable models, consistency, robust estimation.

preprint2012arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.