IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cmf/wpaper/wp2022_2213.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Score-type tests for normal mixtures

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Testing normality against discrete normal mixtures is complex because some parameters turn increasingly underidentified along alternative ways of approaching the null, others are inequality constrained, and several higher-order derivatives become identically 0. These problems make the maximum of the alternative model log-likelihood function numerically unreliable. We propose score-type tests asymptotically equivalent to the likelihood ratio as the largest of two simple intuitive statistics that only require estimation under the null. One novelty of our approach is that we treat symmetrically both ways of writing the null hypothesis without excluding any region of the parameter space. We derive the asymptotic distribution of our tests under the null and sequences of local alternatives. We also show that their asymptotic distribution is the same whether applied to observations or standardized residuals from heteroskedastic regression models. Finally, we study their power in simulations and apply them to the residuals of Mincer earnings functions.

Suggested Citation

  • Dante Amengual & Xinyue Bei & Marine Carrasco & Enrique Sentana, 2022. "Score-type tests for normal mixtures," Working Papers wp2022_2213, CEMFI.
  • Handle: RePEc:cmf:wpaper:wp2022_2213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cemfi.es/ftp/wp/2213.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bontemps, Christian & Meddahi, Nour, 2005. "Testing normality: a GMM approach," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 149-186, January.
    2. Jin Seo Cho & Halbert White, 2007. "Testing for Regime Switching," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(6), pages 1671-1720, November.
    3. Stephen V. Cameron & James J. Heckman, 1998. "Life Cycle Schooling and Dynamic Selection Bias: Models and Evidence for Five Cohorts of American Males," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(2), pages 262-333, April.
    4. Heckman, James & Singer, Burton, 1984. "A Method for Minimizing the Impact of Distributional Assumptions in Econometric Models for Duration Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(2), pages 271-320, March.
    5. Griliches, Zvi & Mason, William M, 1972. "Education, Income, and Ability," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(3), pages 74-103, Part II, .
    6. Hanfeng Chen & Jiahua Chen & John D. Kalbfleisch, 2004. "Testing for a finite mixture model with two components," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 66(1), pages 95-115, February.
    7. Martín Almuzara & Dante Amengual & Enrique Sentana, 2019. "Normality tests for latent variables," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(3), pages 981-1017, July.
    8. Dante Amengual & Xinyue Bei & Enrique Sentana, 2020. "Hypothesis Tests with a Repeatedly Singular Information Matrix," Working Papers wp2020_2002, CEMFI.
    9. Dante Amengual & Enrique Sentana & Zhanyuan Tian, 2022. "Gaussian Rank Correlation and Regression," Advances in Econometrics, in: Essays in Honor of M. Hashem Pesaran: Panel Modeling, Micro Applications, and Econometric Methodology, volume 43, pages 269-306, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    10. Giovanni Compiani & Yuichi Kitamura, 2016. "Using mixtures in econometric models: a brief review and some new results," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 19(3), pages 95-127, October.
    11. Stephen V. Cameron & James J. Heckman, 1998. "Life Cycle Schooling and Dynamic Selection Bias: Models and Evidence for Five Cohorts," NBER Working Papers 6385, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Kiefer, Nicholas M. & Salmon, Mark, 1983. "Testing normality in econometric models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 11(1-2), pages 123-127.
    13. Jacob A. Mincer, 1974. "Introduction to "Schooling, Experience, and Earnings"," NBER Chapters, in: Schooling, Experience, and Earnings, pages 1-4, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Lee, Lung-Fei & Chesher, Andrew, 1986. "Specification testing when score test statistics are identically zero," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 121-149, March.
    15. Hanfeng Chen & Jiahua Chen & John D. Kalbfleisch, 2001. "A modified likelihood ratio test for homogeneity in finite mixture models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 63(1), pages 19-29.
    16. Horowitz, Joel L & Manski, Charles F, 1995. "Identification and Robustness with Contaminated and Corrupted Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(2), pages 281-302, March.
    17. Keane, Michael P & Wolpin, Kenneth I, 1997. "The Career Decisions of Young Men," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(3), pages 473-522, June.
    18. Jushan Bai & Serena Ng, 2005. "Tests for Skewness, Kurtosis, and Normality for Time Series Data," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 23, pages 49-60, January.
    19. Bai, Jushan & Ng, Serena, 2001. "A consistent test for conditional symmetry in time series models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 103(1-2), pages 225-258, July.
    20. Andrews, Donald W K, 1993. "Tests for Parameter Instability and Structural Change with Unknown Change Point," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(4), pages 821-856, July.
    21. Marine Carrasco & Liang Hu & Werner Ploberger, 2014. "Optimal Test for Markov Switching Parameters," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(2), pages 765-784, March.
    22. Chen, Xiaohong & Ponomareva, Maria & Tamer, Elie, 2014. "Likelihood inference in some finite mixture models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 182(1), pages 87-99.
    23. Hiroyuki Kasahara & Katsumi Shimotsu, 2015. "Testing the Number of Components in Normal Mixture Regression Models," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 110(512), pages 1632-1645, December.
    24. Andrews, Donald W K, 2001. "Testing When a Parameter Is on the Boundary of the Maintained Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(3), pages 683-734, May.
    25. Jean-Marie Dufour & Abdeljelil Farhat & Lucien Gardiol & Lynda Khalaf, 1998. "Simulation-based finite sample normality tests in linear regressions," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 1(Conferenc), pages 154-173.
    26. Jarque, Carlos M. & Bera, Anil K., 1980. "Efficient tests for normality, homoscedasticity and serial independence of regression residuals," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 255-259.
    27. Jacob A. Mincer, 1974. "Schooling, Experience, and Earnings," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number minc74-1, October.
    28. Prosper Dovonon & Eric Renault, 2013. "Testing for Common Conditionally Heteroskedastic Factors," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(6), pages 2561-2586, November.
    29. Amengual, Dante & Carrasco, Marine & Sentana, Enrique, 2020. "Testing distributional assumptions using a continuum of moments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 655-689.
    30. Gabriele Fiorentini & Enrique Sentana, 2007. "On the efficiency and consistency of likelihood estimation in multivariate conditionally heteroskedastic dynamic regression models," Working Paper series 38_07, Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis.
    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. Yu Hao & Hiroyuki Kasahara, 2025. "Estimating the Number of Components in Panel Data Finite Mixture Regression Models with an Application to Production Function Heterogeneity," Papers 2506.09666, arXiv.org.
    2. Yu Hao & Hiroyuki Kasahara, 2022. "Testing the Number of Components in Finite Mixture Normal Regression Model with Panel Data," Papers 2210.02824, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2023.
    3. Giovanni Compiani & Yuichi Kitamura, 2016. "Using mixtures in econometric models: a brief review and some new results," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 19(3), pages 95-127, October.
    4. Belzil, Christian, 2007. "The return to schooling in structural dynamic models: a survey," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(5), pages 1059-1105, July.
    5. Juanna Schrøter Joensen, 2010. "Timing and Incentives: Impacts of Student Aid on Academic Achievement," 2010 Meeting Papers 823, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    6. Heckman, James J. & Navarro, Salvador, 2007. "Dynamic discrete choice and dynamic treatment effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 136(2), pages 341-396, February.
    7. Yuichi Kitamura & Louise Laage, 2018. "Nonparametric Analysis of Finite Mixtures," Papers 1811.02727, arXiv.org.
    8. Heckman, James J. & Urzúa, Sergio, 2010. "Comparing IV with structural models: What simple IV can and cannot identify," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 156(1), pages 27-37, May.
    9. Sergei Koulayev & Marc Rysman & Scott Schuh & Joanna Stavins, 2016. "Explaining adoption and use of payment instruments by US consumers," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(2), pages 293-325, May.
    10. Dragomirescu-Gaina, Catalin & Elia, Leandro & Weber, Anke, 2015. "A fast-forward look at tertiary education attainment in Europe 2020," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 804-819.
    11. Bontemps, Christian & Meddahi, Nour, 2005. "Testing normality: a GMM approach," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 149-186, January.
    12. Heckman, James J. & Humphries, John Eric & Veramendi, Gregory, 2016. "Dynamic treatment effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 191(2), pages 276-292.
    13. Lu, Zeng-Hua, 2009. "Covariate selection in mixture models with the censored response variable," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(7), pages 2710-2723, May.
    14. Javier Mencía & Enrique Sentana, 2012. "Distributional Tests in Multivariate Dynamic Models with Normal and Student-t Innovations," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(1), pages 133-152, February.
    15. Belzil, Christian & Poinas, François, 2010. "Education and early career outcomes of second-generation immigrants in France," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 101-110, January.
    16. Kasahara Hiroyuki & Shimotsu Katsumi, 2012. "Testing the Number of Components in Finite Mixture Models," Global COE Hi-Stat Discussion Paper Series gd12-259, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    17. Belzil, Christian & Leonardi, Marco, 2007. "Can risk aversion explain schooling attainments? Evidence from Italy," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 957-970, December.
    18. Meitz, Mika & Saikkonen, Pentti, 2021. "Testing for observation-dependent regime switching in mixture autoregressive models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 222(1), pages 601-624.
    19. Ge, Suqin, 2013. "Estimating the returns to schooling: Implications from a dynamic discrete choice model," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 92-105.
    20. Hiroyuki Kasahara & Katsumi Shimotsu, 2018. "Testing the Number of Regimes in Markov Regime Switching Models," Papers 1801.06862, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2018.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Generalized extremum tests; higher-order identifiability; likelihood ratio test; Mincer equations.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General
    • C46 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Specific Distributions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cmf:wpaper:wp2022_2213. 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: Araceli Requerey (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cemfies.html .

    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.