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

From |
"E. Paul Wileyto" <epw@mail.med.upenn.edu> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: nl command with restriction |

Date |
Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:23:47 -0500 |

I thought the logistic transformation was elegant. Penalty functions are brute force... And I cannot think of another approach that handles the restriction that well. The approach I indicated also points out that the number of parameters Rudolfo needs to estimate is one less than he thought because of the restriction. And after the model fit, it's very easy to use nlcom to get back estimates and standard errors for A,B, and C.

Paul

And once done, it

Nick Cox wrote:

Good point. I was thinking in simpler terms of e.g. a and (1 - a). I--

know that does not guarantee that either parameter is between 0 and 1,

but there is perhaps a difference between gentle force and brute force

here. That is, if gentle force does not work and brute force is

essential you've learned something about the model fitting.

E. Paul Wileyto

Rudolfo stated that the parameters are all positive and sum to 1, so the

values are going to act like proportions, even if you don't think of them that way. We use this approach all the time to put bounds on estimates.

Nick Cox wrote:

Rodolfo's parameters add to 1. His problem differs from that ofvarious

responses that are all proportions and thus add to 1.are

Nick

n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk

E. Paul Wileyto

It might be easiest to incorporate a transform into the equation you

estimating. -nl- will expect coefficients that range from minus toplus

infinity. You could get everything you want by transforming as a multinomial logistic probability.variable

suppose you want to estimate A, B, and C which add to 1. -nl-

b0.. ranges - to + inf.*

replace the parameters in your equation with :

A=exp(b0)/(1+exp(b0)+exp(b1))

B=exp(b1)/(1+exp(b0)+exp(b1)

C=1/(1+exp(b0)+exp(b1))

Rodolfo Coelho Prates wrote:

I estimated a Cobb-Douglas function with additive error (nl command),the

coeficients are negative and the sum are larger than one, in somecases.

I need that the coeficients are larger than zero and the sum of the

coeficients are equal to one. How can I estimate the function with

restriction in Stata?

* 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/

E. Paul Wileyto, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Biostatistics

Tobacco Use Research Center

School of Medicine, U. of Pennsylvania

3535 Market Street, Suite 4100

Philadelphia, PA 19104-3309

215-746-7147

Fax: 215-746-7140

epw@mail.med.upenn.edu

http://mail.med.upenn.edu/~epw/

*

* 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/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: nl command with restriction***From:*"Rodolfo Coelho Prates" <rcprates@esalq.usp.br>

**References**:**st: truncreg with panel data***From:*Anita <anita.metzger@vtxmail.ch>

**st: RE: truncreg with panel data***From:*Even Bergseng <even.bergseng@umb.no>

**st: nl command with restriction***From:*"Rodolfo Coelho Prates" <rcprates@esalq.usp.br>

**Re: st: nl command with restriction***From:*"E. Paul Wileyto" <epw@mail.med.upenn.edu>

**RE: st: nl command with restriction***From:*"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

**Re: st: nl command with restriction***From:*"E. Paul Wileyto" <epw@mail.med.upenn.edu>

**RE: st: nl command with restriction***From:*"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

- Prev by Date:
**RE: st: nl command with restriction** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: RE: random effects with truncreg possible** - Previous by thread:
**RE: st: nl command with restriction** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: nl command with restriction** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2017 StataCorp LLC | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |