We show by example that empirical likelihood and other commonly used tests for moment restrictions are unable to control the (exponential) rate at which the probability of a Type I error tends to zero unless the possible distributions for the observed data are restricted appropriately. From this, it follows that for the optimality claim for empirical likelihood in Kitamura (2001) to hold, additional assumptions and qualifications are required. Under stronger assumptions than those in Kitamura (2001), we establish the following optimality result: (i) empirical likelihood controls the rate at which the probability of a Type I error tends to zero and (ii) among all procedures for which the probability of a Type I error tends to zero at least as fast, empirical likelihood maximizes the rate at which the probability of a Type II error tends to zero for alternatives. This result further implies that empirical likelihood maximizes the rate at which the probability of a Type II error tends to zero for all alternatives among a class of tests that satisfy a weaker criterion for their Type I error probabilities.
MLA
Kitamura, Yuichi, et al. “On the Asymptotic Optimality of Empirical Likelihood for Testing Moment Restrictions.” Econometrica, vol. 80, .no 1, Econometric Society, 2012, pp. 413-423, https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA8773
Chicago
Kitamura, Yuichi, Andres Santos, and Azeem M. Shaikh. “On the Asymptotic Optimality of Empirical Likelihood for Testing Moment Restrictions.” Econometrica, 80, .no 1, (Econometric Society: 2012), 413-423. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA8773
APA
Kitamura, Y., Santos, A., & Shaikh, A. M. (2012). On the Asymptotic Optimality of Empirical Likelihood for Testing Moment Restrictions. Econometrica, 80(1), 413-423. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA8773
By clicking the "Accept" button or continuing to browse our site, you agree to first-party and session-only cookies being stored on your device. Cookies are used to optimize your experience and anonymously analyze website performance and traffic.