Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2608.06053

Breakdown Reliability for Saturated Fixed-Effect Inference

Abstract

Fixed-effect saturation does not itself distort conventional inference, but classical measurement error does. Under a local noise drift $σ_ν^2=c^2/n$, the FE-OLS $t$-statistic converges to a non-central normal; saturation contributes a common $\sqrt{1-ρ}$ scaling rather than preferentially destroying signal or noise. Inverting the size distortion gives a Stock--Yogo-style critical value. Self-consistency of the within-reliability-corrected pilot yields a breakdown reliability $λ^{\dagger}=|t|/(|t|+η^{\dagger})$ --- the minimum within reliability at which conventional inference retains nominal size within the chosen tolerance --- computable from the reported $t$-statistic alone and algebraically $ρ$-free conditional on it; $η^{\dagger}\approx0.65$ at $5\%$ size and a 5-point tolerance. Replacing $|t|$ by $|t|+z_{1-γ_β}$ gives a certified breakdown reliability; with a lower-reliability bound whose coverage error is $γ_λ$, false certification is at most $γ_β+γ_λ$. Under a checkable projection-compatibility condition, a cluster-level score CLT and consistency of the Arellano variance estimator in the many-fixed-effect regime justify applying the same map to the reported cluster-robust $t$-statistic; clustering can reverse a verdict. In a saturated democracy--growth panel, aggregate V-Dem polyarchy is certified at $γ_β=0.05$, conditional on the supplied measurement model, while its judicial-constraints sub-index is flagged under i.i.d.\ and clustered standard errors. In a twin-pair wage design, the specification is flagged under both independent and correlated reporting-error models, although implied coverage of the nominal-$95\%$ interval ranges from $8\%$ to $68\%$. The diagnostic covers classical error in a continuous regressor, not binary-treatment misclassification.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Stanisław M. S. Halkiewicz. 2026-09-03. Breakdown Reliability for Saturated Fixed-Effect Inference. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.06053

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