ScholarGate
Asistents

Salīdzināt metodes

Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.

Metodes (CEM / Optimālā / Ģenētiskā)×Lokālais vidējais ārstēšanas efekts (LATE / CACE)×
NozareCēloņsakarību secināšanaCēloņsakarību secināšana
SaimeRegression modelRegression model
Izcelsmes gads20121994
AutorsIacus, King & Porro (CEM); Hansen (optimal/full matching)Imbens & Angrist (1994); Angrist, Imbens & Rubin (1996)
TipsMatching for causal inferenceInstrumental-variable causal estimand
PirmavotsIacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2012). Causal Inference without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching. Political Analysis, 20(1), 1-24. DOI ↗Imbens, G. W., & Angrist, J. D. (1994). Identification and Estimation of Local Average Treatment Effects. Econometrica, 62(2), 467-475. DOI ↗
Citi nosaukumicoarsened exact matching, optimal matching, genetic matching, CEMLATE, CACE, complier average causal effect, Yerel Ortalama Tedavi Etkisi (LATE / CACE)
Saistītās55
KopsavilkumsMatching Methods are a family of causal-inference techniques beyond propensity-score matching that pair treated and control units with similar covariates so that a treatment effect can be read off the balanced sample. The family includes Coarsened Exact Matching (Iacus, King & Porro, 2012), optimal matching, and genetic matching.The Local Average Treatment Effect is an instrumental-variable estimand, introduced by Imbens and Angrist (1994) and formalised with Rubin (1996), that recovers the average treatment effect for the subpopulation of compliers — units whose treatment status is actually moved by the instrument. It is closely tied to compliance analysis.
ScholarGateDatu kopa
  1. v1
  2. 2 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED

Doties uz meklēšanu Lejupielādēt slaidus

ScholarGateSalīdzināt metodes: Matching Methods · Local Average Treatment Effect. Izgūts 2026-06-17 no https://scholargate.app/lv/compare