Statalist The Stata Listserver


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

RE: st: RE: RE: RE: More on F test and the translog


From   "Gauri Khanna" <gwkhanna@hotmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   RE: st: RE: RE: RE: More on F test and the translog
Date   Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:27:12 +0000

Dear Maarten and Nick,

Thank you again for your replies. Yes, I think I will drop it because there is no conjecture involved and it does hold by definition. It's just strange to see it in the test..

Also, ball games and homogeneity now go together!!

Regards,

Gauri

Doesn't that equality hold by definition? In that case there is no need to test
it.

-----------------------------------------
Maarten L. Buis
Department of Social Research Methodology
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Boelelaan 1081
1081 HV Amsterdam
The Netherlands

visiting adress:
Buitenveldertselaan 3 (Metropolitan), room Z214

+31 20 5986715

http://home.fsw.vu.nl/m.buis/


From: "Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>
Reply-To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
To: <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
Subject: st: RE: RE: RE: More on F test and the translog
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:25:48 +0100

Thanks for the explanation. So, if I understand this,
the parameters are, or are forced to be, one and the same.

In that case, I can't see that you have a testable hypothesis,
or even a hypothesis. What you have ensured as a consequence
of your estimation is not an economic conjecture that needs to
be checked.

I'm reminded of a conversation I had in which I mentioned
that students from my university play ball games with
students from other universities on Wednesday. "Oh",
said the other person, from another university, "what
a coincidence, so too do students from my place". But
it wasn't a coincidence at all: it is all deliberate.
If Durham play Glasgow on Wednesdays, it follows ineluctably
that Glasgow play Durham on Wednesdays.

Nick
n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk

Gauri Khanna

> Thank you for your reply. I am sorry if I was not clear.
>
> The translog described in my email does not estimate Beta21,
> Beta31 and
> Beta32. The reason is because when one estimates the
> translog,, LnX1.LnX2 is
> the same as Ln.X2.LnX1, similarly for LnX2.LnX3=LnX3.LnX2
> etc.. These cross
> products are not viewed as different from each other and
> hence only one of
> the pair is estimated.
>
> But the homogeneity test requires equality between
> Beta(12)=Beta(21) etc in
> addition to the others..
>
> I am new with this test for homogeneity and am hoping that I
> have got it
> correct.


*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/




© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index