Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2606.07984

Lagrange multipliers in Maximum likelihood estimations and Least squares problems with Constraints

Abstract

This study investigates a statistical property of Lagrange multipliers in constrained Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) and Least Squares (LS) problems from the perspective of numerical optimization. Building on large-sample theory, we show that the associated Lagrange multipliers converge to zero as the sample size increases, provided the distribution is correctly specified in MLE or the residuals are normally distributed in LS. Although this asymptotic behavior has long been recognized in statistics, it has received little explicit attention in numerical optimization and has rarely been exploited in algorithmic design. Importantly, the insight extends beyond classical low-dimensional settings: even in modern high-dimensional applications, such as deep learning, where the number of parameters may exceed the sample size, the same reasoning applies provided the generalization performance is good. This observation has two main implications. First, many constrained optimization algorithms, including the Augmented Lagrangian Method, Sequential Quadratic Programming, and Interior Point methods, require initial values for the multipliers, and choosing zero is statistically justified. Numerical experiments for constrained regressions and dynamic discrete choice model estimations support this implication by showing that initializing multipliers at zero usually lead to stable and efficient performance. Second, penalty-based approaches that convert constrained problems into unconstrained ones can perform well when the true multipliers are small. This helps explain why penalty-based methods often perform well in practice.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Takeshi Fukasawa. 2026-06-06. Lagrange multipliers in Maximum likelihood estimations and Least squares problems with Constraints. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.07984

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Difference-in-Differences with Unpoolable Data

Difference-in-differences (DID) is commonly used to estimate treatment effects but is infeasible in settings where data are unpoolable due to privacy concerns or legal restrictions on data sharing, particularly across jurisdictions. In this study, we identify and relax the assumption of data poolability in DID estimation. We propose an innovative approach to estimate DID with unpoolable data (UN-DID) which can accommodate covariates, multiple groups, and staggered adoption. Through analytical proofs and Monte Carlo simulations, we show that UN-DID and conventional DID estimates of the average treatment effect and standard errors are equal and unbiased in settings without covariates. With covariates, both methods produce estimates that are unbiased, equivalent, and converge to the true value. The estimates differ slightly but the statistical inference and substantive conclusions remain the same. Two empirical examples with real-world data further underscore UN-DID's utility. The UN-DID method allows the estimation of cross-jurisdictional treatment effects with unpoolable data, enabling better counterfactuals to be used and new research questions to be answered.

econ.EM

The Promise of Time-Series Foundation Models for Agricultural Forecasting: Evidence from Commodity Prices

Forecasting agricultural markets remains challenging due to nonlinear dynamics, structural breaks, and sparse data. A long-standing belief holds that simple time-series methods outperform more advanced alternatives. This paper provides the first systematic evidence that this belief no longer holds with modern time-series foundation models (TSFMs). Using USDA ERS monthly commodity price data from 1997-2025, we evaluate 17 forecasting approaches across four model classes, including traditional time-series, machine learning, deep learning, and five state-of-the-art TSFMs (Chronos, Chronos-2, TimesFM 2.5, Time-MoE, Moirai-2), and construct annual marketing year price predictions to compare with USDA's futures-based season-average price (SAP) forecasts. We show that zero-shot foundation models consistently outperform traditional time-series methods, machine learning, and deep learning architectures trained from scratch in both monthly and annual forecasting. Furthermore, foundation models remarkably outperform USDA's futures-based forecasts on three of four major commodities despite USDA's information advantage from forward-looking futures markets. Time-MoE delivers the largest accuracy gains, achieving 54.9% improvement on wheat and 18.5% improvement on corn relative to USDA ERS benchmarks on recent data (2017-2024 excluding COVID). These results point to a paradigm shift in agricultural forecasting.

econ.EM

Testing for Monotone Equilibrium Strategies in Games of Incomplete Information

This paper develops a unified framework for testing monotonicity of Bayesian Nash equilibrium strategies in unobserved types in games of incomplete information. We show that, under symmetric independent private types, monotonicity of differentiable equilibrium strategies is equivalent to monotonicity of a quasi-inverse strategy identified from observed actions. This allows the problem to be reformulated as testing a countable set of moment inequalities involving unconditional expectations. We propose a Cramer-von Mises-type statistic with bootstrap critical values. The method accommodates covariates and game heterogeneity. Monte Carlo simulations demonstrate finite-sample performance, and an application to procurement auctions illustrates cartel detection.

econ.EM