Bookmark and Share

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]

Re: st: GSAMPLE R3300


From   Stas Kolenikov <skolenik@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: GSAMPLE R3300
Date   Thu, 6 Sep 2012 10:44:08 -0500

On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Lieke Boonen (SiRM)
<Lieke.Boonen@sirm.nl> wrote:
> We try to take a sample from our population, without replacement. we have several subgroeps with a high sampling weight. However with the gsample command it gives an error because for these cases the w_i*n /sum(w) is lager than 1. We thought the program looked at the relation between the weights and that this should not be a problem. Does anyone recognize this problem and is there a solution for this problem?

As far as I can recall, -gsample- does a decent job of selecting one
observation from the list, provided, as you found the hard way, that
you don't have any certainty units. However, it is not appropriate for
many real situation sampling problems, which usually require more
complicated code. You also need to be aware that PPSWOR is a very
non-trivial and counter-intuitive task. See
http://www.citeulike.org/user/ctacmo/tag/unequal_prob_sampling for the
appropriate references. All in all, you probably need to do this:

1. Identify the certainty units, set their probability of selection to 1.
2. Adjust the probability distribution, pulling up the probabilities
for other units.
3. Check again for the certainty units: repeat steps 1-2 until the
probability of selection on a single draw have converged.
4. Implement your PPS procedure -- systematic sample is the poor man,
old days shortcut procedure to sample from the physical list on
sheet(s) of paper that leads to technical difficulties in variance
estimation; Rao-Hartley-Cochran is the easiest-to-implement shortcut
that leads to an approximate PPS; Rao-Sampford used to be the most
rigorous choice until Tille's elimination procedures appeared in the
literature.

-- 
-- Stas Kolenikov, PhD, PStat (SSC)  ::  http://stas.kolenikov.name
-- Senior Survey Statistician, Abt SRBI  ::  work email kolenikovs at
srbi dot com
-- Opinions stated in this email are mine only, and do not reflect the
position of my employer

*
*   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/


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