Paper detail

Sparse Linear Models and Two-Stage Estimation in High-Dimensional Settings with Possibly Many Endogenous Regressors

This paper explores the validity of the two-stage estimation procedure for sparse linear models in high-dimensional settings with possibly many endogenous regressors. In particular, the number of endogenous regressors in the main equation and the instruments in the first-stage equations can grow with and exceed the sample size n. The analysis concerns the exact sparsity case, i.e., the maximum number of non-zero components in the vectors of parameters in the first-stage equations, k1, and the number of non-zero components in the vector of parameters in the second-stage equation, k2, are allowed to grow with n but slowly compared to n. I consider the high-dimensional version of the two-stage least square estimator where one obtains the fitted regressors from the first-stage regression by a least square estimator with l_1-regularization (the Lasso or Dantzig selector) when the first-stage regression concerns a large number of instruments relative to n, and then construct a similar estimator using these fitted regressors in the second-stage regression. The main theoretical results of this paper are non-asymptotic bounds from which I establish sufficient scaling conditions on the sample size for estimation consistency in l_2-norm and variable-selection consistency. A technical issue regarding the so-called "restricted eigenvalue (RE) condition" for estimation consistency and the "mutual incoherence (MI) condition" for selection consistency arises in the two-stage estimation from allowing the number of regressors in the main equation to exceed n and this paper provides analysis to verify these RE and MI conditions. Depending on the underlying assumptions, the upper bounds on the l_2-error and the sample size required to obtain these consistency results differ by factors involving k1 and/or k2. Simulations are conducted to gain insight on the finite sample performance.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.

Authors

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.