Benchmarking techniques for reconciling Bayesian small area models at distinct geographic levels

Journal of the Italian Statistical Society - Tập 26 - Trang 557-581 - 2017
Ryan Janicki1, Andrew Vesper2
1U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, USA
2Deloitte Consulting LLP, Minneapolis, USA

Tóm tắt

In sample surveys, there is often insufficient sample size to obtain reliable direct estimates for parameters of interest for certain domains. Precision can be increased by introducing small area models which ‘borrow strength’ by connecting different areas through use of explicit linking models, area-specific random effects, and auxiliary covariate information. One consequence of the use of small area models is that small area estimates at a lower (for example, county) geographic level typically will not aggregate to the estimate at the corresponding higher (for example, state) geographic level. Benchmarking is the statistical procedure for reconciling these differences. This paper provides new perspectives for the benchmarking problem, especially for complex Bayesian small area models which require Markov Chain Monte Carlo estimation. Two new approaches to Bayesian benchmarking are introduced: one procedure based on minimum discrimination information, and another procedure for fully Bayesian self-consistent conditional benchmarking. Notably the proposed procedures construct adjusted posterior distributions whose first and higher order moments are consistent with the benchmarking constraints. It is shown that certain existing benchmarked estimators are special cases of the proposed methodology under normality, giving a distributional justification for the use of benchmarked estimates. Additionally, a ‘flexible’ benchmarking constraint is introduced, where the higher geographic level estimate is not considered fixed, and is simultaneously adjusted, along with lower level estimates.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Azzalini A (1985) A class of distributions which includes the normal ones. Scand J Stat 12:171–178 Battese GE, Harter RH, Fuller WA (1988) An error-components model for prediction of county crop areas using survey and satellite data. J Am Stat Assoc 83:28–36 Bell WR, Datta GS, Ghosh M (2013) Benchmarking small area estimators. Biometrika 100:189–202 Berger JO (1985) Statistical decision theory and Bayesian analysis, 2nd edn. Springer, New York Datta GS, Ghosh M, Steorts R, Maples J (2011) Bayesian benchmarking with applications to small area estimation. TEST 20:574–588 Fay RE, Herriot RA (1979) Estimates of income from small places: an application of James–Stein procedures to census data. J Am Stat Assoc 74:269–277 Gelfand AE, Smith AFM (1990) Sampling-based approaches to calculating marginal densities. J Am Stat Assoc 85:398–409 Ghosh M, Steorts R (2013) Two-stage Bayesian benchmarking as applied to small area estimation. TEST 22(4):670–687 Ghosh M, Kubokawa T, Kawakubo Y (2015) Benchmarked empirical bayes methods in multiplicative area-level models with risk evaluation. Biometrika 102:647–659 Isaki CT, Tsay JH, Fuller WA (2000) Estimation of census adjustment factors. Surv Methodol 26:31–42 Jaynes ET (1957) Information theory and statistical mechanics. Phys Rev 106:620–630 Knottnerus P (2003) Sample survey theory: some pythagorean perspectives. Springer, New York Kullback S (1959) Information theory and statistics. Wiley, New York Kullback S, Liebler RA (1951) On information and sufficiency. Ann Math Stat 22:79–86 Nandram B, Toto MCS, Choi JW (2011) A Bayesian benchmarking of the Scott–Smith model for small areas. J Stat Comput Simul 81:1593–1608 Pfeffermann D, Barnard CH (1991) New estimators for small-area means with applications to the assessment of farmland values. J Bus Econ Stat 9:73–84 R Development Core Team (2011) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. http://www.R-project.org/ Rao JNK, Molina I (2015) Small area estimation, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York Seber GAF (2008) A matrix handbook for statisticians. Wiley, Hoboken Sostra K, Traat I (2009) Optimal domain estimation under summation restriction. J Stat Plann Inference 139:3928–3941 Toto MCS, Nandram B (2010) A Bayesian predictive inference for small area means incorporating covariates and sampling weights. J Stat Plann Inference 140:2963–2979 Wang J, Fuller WA, Qu Y (2008) Small area estimation under a restriction. Surv Methodol 34:29–36 You Y, Rao JNK (2002) A pseudo-empirical best linear unbiased prediction approach to small area estimation using survey weights. Can J Stat 30:431–439 You Y, Rao JNK, Dick P (2004) Benchmarking hierarchical Bayes small area estimators in the Canadian census undercoverage estimation. Stat Transit 6:631–640