To pool or not to pool: The quality bank case

Badi H. Baltagi

doi:10.1080/00031305.1987.10475468

To pool or not to pool: The quality bank case

Badi H. Baltagi

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Drawing on a recent hearing before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, this article illustrates how two statisticians on opposing sides, using two different approaches to the problem, arrived at the same estimator. The differences between the two approaches are highlighted and a proof for the equivalence of the two estimators is given.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	150-152
Number of pages	3
Journal	American Statistician
Volume	41
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.1987.10475468
State	Published - May 1987
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

Bartlett test
Chow test
Dummy variables
Heteroscedasticity
Seemingly unrelated regressions
Wald test

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Statistics and Probability
General Mathematics
Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty

Access to Document

10.1080/00031305.1987.10475468

Cite this

@article{ff2f22eca3424de0a4ea10b11617b8e2,

title = "To pool or not to pool: The quality bank case",

abstract = "Drawing on a recent hearing before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, this article illustrates how two statisticians on opposing sides, using two different approaches to the problem, arrived at the same estimator. The differences between the two approaches are highlighted and a proof for the equivalence of the two estimators is given.",

keywords = "Bartlett test, Chow test, Dummy variables, Heteroscedasticity, Seemingly unrelated regressions, Wald test",

author = "Baltagi, {Badi H.}",

year = "1987",

month = may,

doi = "10.1080/00031305.1987.10475468",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "41",

pages = "150--152",

journal = "American Statistician",

issn = "0003-1305",

publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - To pool or not to pool

T2 - The quality bank case

AU - Baltagi, Badi H.

PY - 1987/5

Y1 - 1987/5

N2 - Drawing on a recent hearing before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, this article illustrates how two statisticians on opposing sides, using two different approaches to the problem, arrived at the same estimator. The differences between the two approaches are highlighted and a proof for the equivalence of the two estimators is given.

AB - Drawing on a recent hearing before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, this article illustrates how two statisticians on opposing sides, using two different approaches to the problem, arrived at the same estimator. The differences between the two approaches are highlighted and a proof for the equivalence of the two estimators is given.

KW - Bartlett test

KW - Chow test

KW - Dummy variables

KW - Heteroscedasticity

KW - Seemingly unrelated regressions

KW - Wald test

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84892281222&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84892281222&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/00031305.1987.10475468

DO - 10.1080/00031305.1987.10475468

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84892281222

SN - 0003-1305

VL - 41

SP - 150

EP - 152

JO - American Statistician

JF - American Statistician

IS - 2

ER -

To pool or not to pool: The quality bank case

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this