Machine Labor / Joshua Angrist, Brigham Frandsen.

By:

Angrist, Joshua

Contributor(s):

Material type: Text

TextSeries: Working Paper Series (National Bureau of Economic Research) ; no. w26584.Publication details: Cambridge, Mass. National Bureau of Economic Research 2019.Description: 1 online resource: illustrations (black and white)Subject(s):

Online resources:

Available additional physical forms:

Hardcopy version available to institutional subscribers

Abstract: Machine learning (ML) is mostly a predictive enterprise, while the questions of interest to labor economists are mostly causal. In pursuit of causal effects, however, ML may be useful for automated selection of ordinary least squares (OLS) control variables. We illustrate the utility of ML for regression-based causal inference by using lasso to select control variables for estimates of effects of college characteristics on wages. ML also seems relevant for an instrumental variables (IV) first stage, since the bias of two-stage least squares can be said to be due to over-fitting. Our investigation shows, however, that while ML-based instrument selection can improve on conventional 2SLS estimates, split-sample IV, jackknife IV, and LIML estimators do better. In some scenarios, the performance of ML-augmented IV estimators is degraded by pretest bias. In others, nonlinear ML for covariate control creates artificial exclusion restrictions that generate spurious findings. ML does better at choosing control variables for models identified by conditional independence assumptions than at choosing instrumental variables for models identified by exclusion restrictions.

Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.

Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)

Holdings
Item type	Home library	Collection	Call number	Status	Date due	Barcode	Item holds
Working Paper	Biblioteca Digital	Colección NBER	nber w26584 (Browse shelf(Opens below))	Not For Loan

Total holds: 0

December 2019.

Machine learning (ML) is mostly a predictive enterprise, while the questions of interest to labor economists are mostly causal. In pursuit of causal effects, however, ML may be useful for automated selection of ordinary least squares (OLS) control variables. We illustrate the utility of ML for regression-based causal inference by using lasso to select control variables for estimates of effects of college characteristics on wages. ML also seems relevant for an instrumental variables (IV) first stage, since the bias of two-stage least squares can be said to be due to over-fitting. Our investigation shows, however, that while ML-based instrument selection can improve on conventional 2SLS estimates, split-sample IV, jackknife IV, and LIML estimators do better. In some scenarios, the performance of ML-augmented IV estimators is degraded by pretest bias. In others, nonlinear ML for covariate control creates artificial exclusion restrictions that generate spurious findings. ML does better at choosing control variables for models identified by conditional independence assumptions than at choosing instrumental variables for models identified by exclusion restrictions.