The linear model is

$$y_{i}= x_{i}'\beta+u_{i}$$

When written in vector notation such that $y_{i}$ is a $1$ x $1$ matrix of outcomes, $x_{i}'$ is a $1$ x $k$ matrix of control variables, $\beta$ is a $k$ x $1$ matrix of population parameters for the coefficients of the control variables, and $u_{i}$ is a $1$ x $1$ matrix for the residual error term.

$F_{R}$ is the robust F statistic for the linear model.

$$F_{R}= (R\hat\beta_{ols}- c)'\Big[R[\sum{x_{i}x_{i}'}]^{-1}[\sum{\hat u^2_{i}x_{i}x_{i}'}][\sum{x_{i}x_{i}'}]^{-1}R'\Big]^{-1}(R\hat\beta_{ols}- c)/J$$

where $R$ is a $j$ x $k$ matrix of restrictions, $c$ is a $j$ x $1$ matrix of null hypothesis, $\hat\beta_{ols}$ is a $k$ x $1$ matrix of estimates of coefficients of $x_{i}$, $\hat u_{i}$ is a $1$ x $1$ matrix of the estimated residual error, $J$ is the degrees freedom, I think it is a scalar but I am not 100% certain.

How do you prove that $F_{R}$ is asymptotically approximately chi squared distributed with $J$ degrees of freedom.

$$ F_{R} \sim \chi^{2}(J) $$

  • $\begingroup$ Please tell us what asymptotics you have in mind and what procedure the F statistic is used for, for otherwise this result is not generally true. $\endgroup$ – whuber Dec 28 '18 at 15:13
  • $\begingroup$ If the number of degrees of freedom in the denominator remains fixed while that in the numerator stays constant, then the distribution approaches a chi-square distribution. The question should get rephrased to make it clear that that is what is meant. $\endgroup$ – Michael Hardy Dec 28 '18 at 19:44
  • $\begingroup$ Following the math writing, apart from $R$ and $c$, other symbols also need to be defined, otherwise, people need to guess what you say, which is not acceptable in scientific writing. $\endgroup$ – user158565 Dec 30 '18 at 5:38

I won't give you the full proof, just some key hints:

  • Recall that, if $X \sim N(A,\Sigma_{l*l}) $, then $ (X-A)'\Sigma^{-1}_{l*l}(X-A) \sim \chi_l^2 $

  • Under the appropiate assumptions we have asymptotic normality i.e. $ \sqrt n (b-\beta)\sim N(0,Var(b) ) $ where b is our OLS estimate

  • $H0:R\beta=c$, then under $H0$ we have $ \sqrt n (Rb-R\beta) = R \sqrt n (b-\beta) \sim N(0,Rvar(b)R') $

  • Under the appropiate assumptions, in large samples the sample variance converges in probability to the true population variance so it's not random anymore


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.