915 resultados para Automated estimator
Resumo:
-tabletutorial- illustrates how Stata can be used to export statistical results and generate customized reports. Part 1 explains how results from Stata routines can be accessed and how they can be exported using the -file- comand or a wrapper such as, e.g., -mat2txt-. Part 2 shows how model estimation results can be archived using -estwrite- and how models can be tabulated and exported to LaTeX, MS Excel, or MS Word using -estout-. Part 3 illustrates how to set up automatic reports in LaTeX or MS Word. The tutorial is based on a talk given at CEPS/INSTEAD in Luxembourg in October 2008. After install, type -help tabletutorial- to start the tutorial (in Stata 8, type -whelp tabletutorial-). The -mat2txt-, -estwrite-, and -estout- packages, also available from SSC, are required to run the examples.
Resumo:
This study was carried out to detect differences in locomotion and feeding behavior in lame (group L; n = 41; gait score ≥ 2.5) and non-lame (group C; n = 12; gait score ≤ 2) multiparous Holstein cows in a cross-sectional study design. A model for automatic lameness detection was created, using data from accelerometers attached to the hind limbs and noseband sensors attached to the head. Each cow's gait was videotaped and scored on a 5-point scale before and after a period of 3 consecutive days of behavioral data recording. The mean value of 3 independent experienced observers was taken as a definite gait score and considered to be the gold standard. For statistical analysis, data from the noseband sensor and one of two accelerometers per cow (randomly selected) of 2 out of 3 randomly selected days was used. For comparison between group L and group C, the T-test, the Aspin-Welch Test and the Wilcoxon Test were used. The sensitivity and specificity for lameness detection was determined with logistic regression and ROC-analysis. Group L compared to group C had significantly lower eating and ruminating time, fewer eating chews, ruminating chews and ruminating boluses, longer lying time and lying bout duration, lower standing time, fewer standing and walking bouts, fewer, slower and shorter strides and a lower walking speed. The model considering the number of standing bouts and walking speed was the best predictor of cows being lame with a sensitivity of 90.2% and specificity of 91.7%. Sensitivity and specificity of the lameness detection model were considered to be very high, even without the use of halter data. It was concluded that under the conditions of the study farm, accelerometer data were suitable for accurately distinguishing between lame and non-lame dairy cows, even in cases of slight lameness with a gait score of 2.5.
Resumo:
The synthetic control (SC) method has been recently proposed as an alternative to estimate treatment effects in comparative case studies. The SC relies on the assumption that there is a weighted average of the control units that reconstruct the potential outcome of the treated unit in the absence of treatment. If these weights were known, then one could estimate the counterfactual for the treated unit using this weighted average. With these weights, the SC would provide an unbiased estimator for the treatment effect even if selection into treatment is correlated with the unobserved heterogeneity. In this paper, we revisit the SC method in a linear factor model where the SC weights are considered nuisance parameters that are estimated to construct the SC estimator. We show that, when the number of control units is fixed, the estimated SC weights will generally not converge to the weights that reconstruct the factor loadings of the treated unit, even when the number of pre-intervention periods goes to infinity. As a consequence, the SC estimator will be asymptotically biased if treatment assignment is correlated with the unobserved heterogeneity. The asymptotic bias only vanishes when the variance of the idiosyncratic error goes to zero. We suggest a slight modification in the SC method that guarantees that the SC estimator is asymptotically unbiased and has a lower asymptotic variance than the difference-in-differences (DID) estimator when the DID identification assumption is satisfied. If the DID assumption is not satisfied, then both estimators would be asymptotically biased, and it would not be possible to rank them in terms of their asymptotic bias.
Resumo:
Federal Highway Administration, Office of Safety and Traffic Operations, Washington, D.C.
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, Office of Safety Research and Development, McLean, Va.
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
Includes bibliographical references.
Resumo:
Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C.
Resumo:
Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C.
Resumo:
Texas Department of Transportation, Austin