Notice: On March 31, it was **announced** that Statalist is moving from an email list to a **forum**. The old list will shut down on April 23, and its replacement, **statalist.org** is already up and running.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

From |
Benjamin Volland <volland@econ.mpg.de> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: reoprob claims to have no observations |

Date |
Tue, 25 Oct 2011 15:10:03 +0200 |

Best, Ben On 05/09/2011 14:24, Nick Cox wrote:

-reoprob-'s code suggests that it ignores missings in a standard way, and it is a wrapper for -oprobit- which would do that too. So, although it's good that you got results, my hunch is that the explanation lies elsewhere. Nick On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Benjamin Volland<volland@econ.mpg.de> wrote:Dear statalisters, just in case anyone runs into similar problems, I wanted to post that the "solution" to the problem described below, was in the end fairly simple. $indepvar contains the lagged dependent variable, which is (naturally) missing for the first observation. Once I deleted the first observation for each unit of analysis reoprob ran without a problem. Hence, my hunch is that reoprob cannot deal with missing values. Hope this helps. Best, Ben On 30/08/2011 15:04, Benjamin Volland wrote:Dear statalisters, I'm currently trying to run a dynamic ordered probit random effects panel estimation as suggested by Woolridge (2005, Journal of Applied Econometrics, Vol. 20 (1), pp. 39-54). I therefore make use of the reoprob command written by Guillaume Frechette (2001, Stata Technical Bulletin, Vol. 10 (59), pp. 23-27). I am using Stata version 10.1. The panel is unbalanced (between 5 and 12 observations per unit of observation). The dependent has 12 steps. The independents contain the LDV, a number of controls (mostly dummies), plus the initial value of the dependent and the mean values of all independents (as suggested by Woolridge). I run a simple pooled ordered probit model up front to identify all variables that may cause problems of multicollinearity (e.g. the mean values of sex and race are the same as the actual values of sex and race). These are dropped before the reoprob estimation, which looks like this: . reoprob foodc $indepvar $meanvarfood $ofoodvar firstfoodc, i(pid) The program then (w/out any problem) runs through the constant-only model . Fitting constant-only model: . Iteration 0: log likelihood = -28629.788 . Iteration 1: log likelihood = -26312.933 . Iteration 2: log likelihood = -26271.232 . Iteration 3: log likelihood = -26269.137 . Iteration 4: log likelihood = -26269.133 . Iteration 5: log likelihood = -26269.133 but after the first iteration of the full model, stata tells me that there are no observations . Fitting full model: . Iteration 0: log likelihood = -23495.781 (not concave) . no observations . r(2000); Interestingly, when I specify the - trace - option it also performs Iteration 1 before returning the same error code. - xtreg ..., re - runs w/out problems (so does the user-written command xtabond2 [Roodman]). Does anyone have a suggestion how I could fix this? Thanks so much, Ben* * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

* * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: st: reoprob claims to have no observations***From:*Joerg Luedicke <joerg.luedicke@gmail.com>

**RE: st: reoprob claims to have no observations***From:*Nick Cox <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>

- Prev by Date:
**st: Test for the difference between two ratios** - Next by Date:
**st: Stata 12 64bit odbc** - Previous by thread:
**st: Test for the difference between two ratios** - Next by thread:
**RE: st: reoprob claims to have no observations** - Index(es):