IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eejocm/v30y2019icp1-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On consistency of the MACML approach to discrete choice modelling

Author

Listed:
  • Batram, Manuel
  • Bauer, Dietmar

Abstract

In this paper the properties of the maximum approximate composite marginal likelihood (MACML) approach to the estimation of multinomial probit models (MNP) proposed by Chandra Bhat and coworkers is investigated with respect to asymptotic properties. It is shown that, if the choice proportions are normalized to sum to one, a variant of the method provides consistent estimates of the choice proportions for a number of approximation methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Batram, Manuel & Bauer, Dietmar, 2019. "On consistency of the MACML approach to discrete choice modelling," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 1-16.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:30:y:2019:i:c:p:1-16
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2018.10.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534517301628
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jocm.2018.10.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee, Lung-Fei, 1992. "On Efficiency of Methods of Simulated Moments and Maximum Simulated Likelihood Estimation of Discrete Response Models," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(4), pages 518-552, December.
    2. Lewandowski, Daniel & Kurowicka, Dorota & Joe, Harry, 2009. "Generating random correlation matrices based on vines and extended onion method," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 100(9), pages 1989-2001, October.
    3. Joel L. Horowitz & Jürg M. Sparmann & Carlos F. Daganzo, 1982. "An Investigation of the Accuracy of the Clark Approximation for the Multinomial Probit Model," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 382-401, August.
    4. Carlos F. Daganzo & Fernando Bouthelier & Yosef Sheffi, 1977. "Multinomial Probit and Qualitative Choice: A Computationally Efficient Algorithm," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 338-358, November.
    5. Ennio Cascetta, 2009. "Transportation Systems Analysis," Springer Optimization and Its Applications, Springer, number 978-0-387-75857-2, June.
    6. Bhat, Chandra R. & Sidharthan, Raghuprasad, 2011. "A simulation evaluation of the maximum approximate composite marginal likelihood (MACML) estimator for mixed multinomial probit models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 940-953, August.
    7. Martinetti, Davide & Geniaux, Ghislain, 2017. "Approximate likelihood estimation of spatial probit models," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 30-45.
    8. Matzkin, Rosa L., 1993. "Nonparametric identification and estimation of polychotomous choice models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1-2), pages 137-168, July.
    9. Patil, Priyadarshan N. & Dubey, Subodh K. & Pinjari, Abdul R. & Cherchi, Elisabetta & Daziano, Ricardo & Bhat, Chandra R., 2017. "Simulation evaluation of emerging estimation techniques for multinomial probit models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 9-20.
    10. Michael G. Langdon, 1984. "Improved Algorithms for Estimating Choice Probabilities in the Multinomial Probit Model," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 267-299, August.
    11. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, October.
    12. Bolduc, Denis, 1999. "A practical technique to estimate multinomial probit models in transportation," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 63-79, February.
    13. Wagner A. Kamakura, 1989. "The Estimation of Multinomial Probit Models: A New Calibration Algorithm," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 253-265, November.
    14. Bhat, Chandra R., 2011. "The maximum approximate composite marginal likelihood (MACML) estimation of multinomial probit-based unordered response choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 923-939, August.
    15. Xuemei Fu & Zhicai Juan, 2017. "Estimation of multinomial probit-kernel integrated choice and latent variable model: comparison on one sequential and two simultaneous approaches," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 91-116, January.
    16. Bhat, Chandra R., 2018. "New matrix-based methods for the analytic evaluation of the multivariate cumulative normal distribution function," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 238-256.
    17. Liu, Yu-Hsin & Mahmassani, Hani S., 2000. "Global maximum likelihood estimation procedure for multinomial probit (MNP) model parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 419-449, June.
    18. Andriy Norets & Satoru Takahashi, 2013. "On the surjectivity of the mapping between utilities and choice probabilities," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 4(1), pages 149-155, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bhat, Chandra R., 2018. "New matrix-based methods for the analytic evaluation of the multivariate cumulative normal distribution function," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 238-256.
    2. Becker, Felix & Danaf, Mazen & Song, Xiang & Atasoy, Bilge & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 2018. "Bayesian estimator for Logit Mixtures with inter- and intra-consumer heterogeneity," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 117(PA), pages 1-17.
    3. Rodrigues, Filipe, 2022. "Scaling Bayesian inference of mixed multinomial logit models to large datasets," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 1-17.
    4. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    5. Martinetti, Davide & Geniaux, Ghislain, 2017. "Approximate likelihood estimation of spatial probit models," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 30-45.
    6. Chandra R. Bhat & Subodh K. Dubey & Mohammad Jobair Bin Alam & Waleed H. Khushefati, 2015. "A New Spatial Multiple Discrete-Continuous Modeling Approach To Land Use Change Analysis," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(5), pages 801-841, November.
    7. Tinessa, Fiore & Marzano, Vittorio & Papola, Andrea, 2020. "Mixing distributions of tastes with a Combination of Nested Logit (CoNL) kernel: Formulation and performance analysis," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 1-23.
    8. Prateek Bansal & Vahid Keshavarzzadeh & Angelo Guevara & Shanjun Li & Ricardo A Daziano, 2022. "Designed quadrature to approximate integrals in maximum simulated likelihood estimation [Evaluating simulation-based approaches and multivariate quadrature on sparse grids in estimating multivariat," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 25(2), pages 301-321.
    9. Tinessa, Fiore, 2021. "Closed-form random utility models with mixture distributions of random utilities: Exploring finite mixtures of qGEV models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 262-288.
    10. Xuemei Fu & Zhicai Juan, 2017. "Estimation of multinomial probit-kernel integrated choice and latent variable model: comparison on one sequential and two simultaneous approaches," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 91-116, January.
    11. Cherchi, Elisabetta & Guevara, Cristian Angelo, 2012. "A Monte Carlo experiment to analyze the curse of dimensionality in estimating random coefficients models with a full variance–covariance matrix," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 321-332.
    12. Stephane Hess, 2014. "Latent class structures: taste heterogeneity and beyond," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 14, pages 311-330, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Bhat, Chandra R. & Mondal, Aupal, 2022. "A New Flexible Generalized Heterogeneous Data Model (GHDM) with an Application to Examine the Effect of High Density Neighborhood Living on Bicycling Frequency," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 244-266.
    14. Bansal, Prateek & Krueger, Rico & Bierlaire, Michel & Daziano, Ricardo A. & Rashidi, Taha H., 2020. "Bayesian estimation of mixed multinomial logit models: Advances and simulation-based evaluations," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 124-142.
    15. Dubey, Subodh & Cats, Oded & Hoogendoorn, Serge & Bansal, Prateek, 2022. "A multinomial probit model with Choquet integral and attribute cut-offs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 140-163.
    16. Ke Wang & Chandra R. Bhat & Xin Ye, 2023. "A multinomial probit analysis of shanghai commute mode choice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(4), pages 1471-1495, August.
    17. Kerem Tuzcuoglu, 2019. "Composite Likelihood Estimation of an Autoregressive Panel Probit Model with Random Effects," Staff Working Papers 19-16, Bank of Canada.
    18. Prateek Bansal & Rico Krueger & Michel Bierlaire & Ricardo A. Daziano & Taha H. Rashidi, 2019. "Bayesian Estimation of Mixed Multinomial Logit Models: Advances and Simulation-Based Evaluations," Papers 1904.03647, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2019.
    19. Haoying Wang & Guohui Wu, 2022. "Modeling discrete choices with large fine-scale spatial data: opportunities and challenges," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 325-351, July.
    20. Haaijer, Marinus E., 1996. "Predictions in conjoint choice experiments : the x-factor probit model," Research Report 96B22, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:30:y:2019:i:c:p:1-16. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-choice-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.