Examining the reliability of logistic regression estimation software

dc.contributor.authorMo, Lijia
dc.date.accessioned2010-12-20T20:37:47Z
dc.date.available2010-12-20T20:37:47Z
dc.date.graduationmonthDecember
dc.date.issued2010-12-20
dc.date.published2010
dc.description.abstractThe reliability of nine software packages using the maximum likelihood estimator for the logistic regression model were examined using generated benchmark datasets and models. Software packages tested included: SAS (Procs Logistic, Catmod, Genmod, Surveylogistic, Glimmix, and Qlim), Limdep (Logit, Blogit), Stata (Logit, GLM, Binreg), Matlab, Shazam, R, Minitab, Eviews, and SPSS for all available algorithms, none of which have been previously tested. This study expands on the existing literature in this area by examination of Minitab 15 and SPSS 17. The findings indicate that Matlab, R, Eviews, Minitab, Limdep (BFGS), and SPSS provided consistently reliable results for both parameter and standard error estimates across the benchmark datasets. While some packages performed admirably, shortcomings did exist. SAS maximum log-likelihood estimators do not always converge to the optimal solution and stop prematurely depending on starting values, by issuing a ``flat" error message. This drawback can be dealt with by rerunning the maximum log-likelihood estimator, using a closer starting point, to see if the convergence criteria are actually satisfied. Although Stata-Binreg provides reliable parameter estimates, there is no way to obtain standard error estimates in Stata-Binreg as of yet. Limdep performs relatively well, but did not converge due to a weakness of the algorithm. The results show that solely trusting the default settings of statistical software packages may lead to non-optimal, biased or erroneous results, which may impact the quality of empirical results obtained by applied economists. Reliability tests indicate severe weaknesses in SAS Procs Glimmix and Genmod. Some software packages fail reliability tests under certain conditions. The finding indicates the need to use multiple software packages to solve econometric models.
dc.description.advisorAllen M. Featherstone
dc.description.advisorBryan W. Schurle
dc.description.degreeDoctor of Philosophy
dc.description.departmentDepartment of Agricultural Economics
dc.description.levelDoctoral
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2097/7059
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherKansas State University
dc.rights© the author. This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s).
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
dc.subjectLogistic Regression
dc.subjectSoftware Reliability
dc.subjectEconometric Models
dc.subject.umiEconomics, Agricultural (0503)
dc.subject.umiStatistics (0463)
dc.titleExamining the reliability of logistic regression estimation software
dc.typeDissertation

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
LijiaMo2010.pdf
Size:
876.92 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.61 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: