ENH: score confidence interval for GLM, discrete
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100
Research direction
No files or tests are named. Start by reviewing the existing profile-likelihood confidence-interval work and the GLM/discrete score-test implementation, then compare the approach with the referenced two-sample proportion methods. Done should include score confidence intervals for GLM and discrete models, including the stated robust-covariance use case.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
score tests are doing quite well overall, score confidence intervals are emphasized in some of the two sample proportion comparisons and are doing also reasonably well for medium sample sizes.
Calculation: see references on two sample proportions.
Essentially we are calculating two one-sided score-tests and search for the Null hypothesis parameter.
In terms of implementation and effort required this should be similar to profile likelihood confidence intervals. An efficient implementation might be able to use the offset and doesn't need to change exog in each case, if we want the confidence interval for a single parameter. (I guess changing the constant for affine restrictions would work in the constrained transformed model, but requires adjusting the constraints transformation but not of the exog, AFAICguess.)
The advantage of score confidence intervals should be that we can use robust covariance matrices to handle overdispersion or heteroscedasticity or correlation.
example http://www.inside-r.org/packages/cran/pairwiseCI/docs/pairwiseCImethodsCount
the mention dispersion problems with profile confidence interval that are handled for the specific proportional overdispersion case by QuasiPoisson (using deviance profile which I never heard but is just scaled loglikelihood, I guess).
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 11.6k
- Forks
- 3.6k
- Avg merge
- 7h 37m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 96
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from statsmodels/statsmodels
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 90/100
statsmodels/statsmodels#10271 ·
-
type-bug
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
statsmodels/statsmodels#10269 ·
-
Documentation
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 92/100
statsmodels/statsmodels#10266 ·
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 78/100
statsmodels/statsmodels#9627 · 1 comment ·
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 62/100
statsmodels/statsmodels#9293 · 1 comment ·
All issues in statsmodels/statsmodels
Similar issues
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100
bancolombia/sentinel#23 ·
-
test md OpenCI
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100
-
integration:quickjs org:external priority:backlog topic:code-interpreter topic:middleware type:feature
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100
langchain-ai/deepagents#6450 ·
-
bug client
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 88/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100