Topic · Statistics & Econometrics
← All topicsRegression
38 articles · 6 checkpoints · 21 deeper reads · 11 reference notes
Every article, in reading order
plant a flag as you finish eachRead these first
When some observations are far noisier than others, your regression coefficient is still right but its error bar is a lie. Robust standard errors let every point report its own noisiness instead of forcing one average on all of them.
Leave something out of a regression and the coefficient you did estimate quietly absorbs its influence. The result is not noisy but systematically wrong, and collecting more data only makes you more confident in the wrong number.
A regression always hands you numbers. The assumptions decide whether those numbers mean anything, some protect the estimate itself, others only protect the error bars, and knowing which is which tells you what to fix.
A two-pass method for testing whether a stock characteristic earns a return premium: run one cross-sectional regression per month, then treat the sequence of monthly slopes as an ordinary time series and t-test its average. It exists because pooling every stock-month into one regression produces standard errors that are far too small.
The recipe for fitting a straight-line-style model to outcomes that aren't shaped like a bell curve, counts, probabilities, yes/no events, by bending the line through a link function before it meets the data.
A way to strip out everything permanent and unobservable about each stock, trader, or country before you estimate the relationship you actually care about, by comparing each unit only to its own history.
Then the rest