This brief tutorial will cover the basics of Monte Carlo Simulations and all the tools that are needed to solve PSet 5. I will use as an example the errors-in-variables model in the context of linear regression. In particular, we want to illustrate with our experiments what we know from studying the theory, as well as some other aspects of programming in R that were left unsaid in the previous tutorial, such as loops, probability distributions, and graphics in R.
Monte Carlo Experiments are a broad class of computational algorithms that rely on repeated random sampling to obtain numerical results. Their essential idea is using randomness to solve problems that might be deterministic in principle. Monte Carlo methods are mainly used in three distinct problem classes:
in this tutorial, we will cover the very basics of the first point, i.e. the possibility of producing a supposedly endless flow of random variables (numbers) for well-known or new distributions.
One convenient use of R is to provide a comprehensive set of statistical tables. Functions are provided to evaluate the cumulative distribution function \(F_X(x)=\mathbf{P}(X\le x)\), the probability density function of \(F_X(\cdot)\), \(f_X(\cdot)\) and the \(t\)-th quantile function, \(F_X^{-1}(\tau)=\inf\{x: F_X(x)>\tau\}\), and to simulate from the distribution:
Distribution | R name | Additional Arguments |
---|---|---|
Beta | beta |
shape1 , shape2 , ncp |
Binomial | binom |
size , prob |
Cauchy | cauchy |
location , scale |
Chi-Squared | chisq |
df , ncp |
Exponential | exp |
rate |
F | f |
df1 , df2 , ncp |
Gamma | gamma |
shape , scale |
Geometric | geom |
prob |
Hypergeometric | hyper |
m , n , k |
Log-normal | lnorm |
meanlog , sdlog |
Logistic | logis |
location , scale |
Negative Binomial | nbinom |
size , prob |
Normal | norm |
mean , sd |
Poisson | pois |
lambda |
Signed Rank | signrank |
n |
t | t |
df , ncp |
Uniform | unif |
min , max |
Weibull | weibull |
shape , scale |
Wilcoxon | wilcox |
m , n |
Prefix the name given here by d
for the density, p
for the CDF, q
for the quantile function and r
for simulation (random deviates). Let’s illustrate this for the normal distribution. If you’re interested in the density, first argument is x
dnorm(x=1.64)
[1] 0.1039611
q for CDF
pnorm(q=0)
[1] 0.5
p for quantile function
qnorm(p=0.05)
[1] -1.644854
and n for the radom generator function
rnorm(n=5)
[1] -1.1221627 0.2439988 -0.1486510 -0.7123628 1.0574298
except for rhyper
, rsignrank
and rwilcox
, for which it is nn. In not quite all cases is the non-centrality parameter ncp
currently available: see the on-line help for details.
The conditional construction follows the form if(exp 1){ exp 2 }else{ exp3}
. For instance
# Generate a random number in [0,1]
r.number <- runif(1)
# Loop
if(r.number>0.3){
print("ok number")
}else {
print("small number")
}
[1] "small number"
There is a vectorized version of the if/else construct, the ifelse
function. Using previous example,
# Loop
ifelse(r.number>0.3,"ok number","small number")
[1] "small number"
There is also a for
loop construction. For a loop variable say i
in a vector expression (most frequently, a sequence), an expression is repeatedly evaluated. For instance,
for(i in seq(1:5)){
i^2
}
Other looping commands are repeat
and while
.
Let’s summarize this model by saying the unobservable variable of interest is \(Z^{*}\), and its observed but mismeasured counterpart is \[ Z=Z^{*}+\eta \] where \(\nu\) denotes the measurement error. Classical Measurement Error assumes that 1) \(Z^{*}\) and \(\eta\) are independent, and 2) \(\mathbb{E}(\eta)=0\).
The textbook example (and conclusion) shows that error in the dependent variable is generally ignored in regression analysis because it simply gets absorbed into the error residual. The only sensible effect is an increase in variability. Hence, inference is more conservative but remains valid nonetheless.
For instance, consider underlying DGP (multivariate normal distribution)
\[ W= \begin{pmatrix} Y \\ X \\ \eta \end{pmatrix}=\mathcal{N}_3\left(\mathbf{0}, \begin{pmatrix} \sigma^2_Y & \sigma_{Y,X} & 0 \\ \sigma_{X,Y} & \sigma^2_X & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & \sigma^2_{\eta} \end{pmatrix}\right) \]
and you observe
\[ \begin{align*} Y^{*}&=Y+\eta\\ X^{*}&=X+\eta\\ \end{align*} \] Suppose we’re interested in parameter \[ \beta=\frac{\sigma_{Y,X}}{\sigma_{X}^2}=\frac{\mathbf{E}(YX)}{\mathbf{E}(X^2)} \]
Draw a random sample of size \(n\). We consider estimators \[ \begin{align*} \hat{\beta}_1&=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^nX_iY^{*}_i}{\sum_{i=1}^nX_i^2}\:\:\: \text{ and }\:\:\: \hat{\beta}_2=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^nY_iX^{*}_i}{\sum_{i=1}^n (X^{*}_i)^2} \end{align*} \] i.e. in model 1, \(Y\) is mismeasured whereas in model 2 variable \(X\) is mismeasured. It’s very easy to show that \(\hat{\beta}_1\) is unbiased and consistent estimator (recall Pset 0). However, \[ \hat{\beta}_2\overset{P}{\rightarrow}\beta\left(\frac{\sigma^2_X}{\sigma^2_X+\sigma^2_{\eta}}\right)\le\beta \:\:\:\text{ as }\:\:\:n\to\infty \]
We can illustrate this with a simple Monte Carlo experiment:
Then the parameters of the DGP
mu <- c(0,0,0)
sigma_y <- 1
sigma_x <- 0.5
sigma_e <- 2
rho=0.5
sigma_yxe <- matrix(c(sigma_y,rho,0,rho,sigma_x,0,0,0,sigma_e),ncol=3)
Parameter of interest
b <- rho*sqrt(sigma_y/sigma_x)
Sample size
N <- 1000
Number of simulations
n.sims <- 500
Last but not least, the seed
. The seed will allow us to replicate and reproduce results. This is one of the most important practices in Monte Carlo Experiments
set.seed(1984)
We want to store 6 estimates: \(\beta_0\) and \(\beta_1\) for three models:
The store matrix
out <- matrix(NA,nrow=n.sims,ncol=6)
at each of the 500 replications, we are generating vector \(Z\)
# Call the package
require(mvtnorm)
Loading required package: mvtnorm
Z <- rmvnorm(n=N,mean = mu, sigma = sigma_yxe)
Contaminated data
Ye <- Z[,1]+Z[,3]
Xe <- Z[,2]+Z[,3]
Estimate the BLP for the three cases
fit1 <- lm(Z[,1]~Z[,2])
fit2 <- lm(Ye~Z[,2])
fit3 <- lm(Z[,1]~Xe)
Then the 6 coefficients are given by
one.sim <- c(fit1$coefficients,fit2$coefficients,fit3$coefficients)
one.sim
(Intercept) Z[, 2] (Intercept) Z[, 2] (Intercept)
0.009104504 0.988055248 -0.032965339 0.989833654 0.014665308
Xe
0.215282638
If we put this in a loop
for(i in 1:n.sims){
# Data Generating Process
Z <- rmvnorm(n=N,mean = mu, sigma = sigma_yxe)
# Contaminated Data
Ye <- Z[,1]+Z[,3]
Xe <- Z[,2]+Z[,3]
# Estimating true relationships
fit1 <- lm(Z[,1]~Z[,2])
# Let's estimate the slope coefficient
# of a linear model ye=bxe+epsilon
fit2 <- lm(Ye~Z[,2])
fit3 <- lm(Z[,1]~Xe)
out[i,] <- c(fit1$coefficients,fit2$coefficients,fit3$coefficients)
}
Let’s create a data frame with the results
coeff1 <- data.frame(b1 = out[,2])
coeff1$type <- 'Error-free'
coeff2 <- data.frame(b1 = out[,4])
coeff2$type <- 'Contaminated'
and combine into your new data frame vegLengths
betaEst <- rbind(coeff1, coeff2)
Call package ggplot2
require(ggplot2)
TRUE Loading required package: ggplot2
Plot the histograms. First, when only \(Y\) is mismeasured
ggplot(betaEst, aes(b1, fill = type)) +
stat_bin(binwidth = 0.001) +
geom_histogram(alpha = 0.5, aes(y = ..density..), position = 'identity')
`stat_bin()` using `bins = 30`. Pick better value with `binwidth`.
and then when only \(X\) is measured with error
coeff3 <- data.frame(b1 = out[,6])
coeff3$type <- 'Contaminated'
betaEst <- rbind(coeff1, coeff3)
ggplot(betaEst, aes(b1, fill = type)) +
stat_bin(binwidth = 0.001) +
geom_histogram(alpha = 0.5, aes(y = ..density..), position = 'identity')
`stat_bin()` using `bins = 30`. Pick better value with `binwidth`.