Developing Integer Calibration Weights for Census of Agriculture

  • Luca SartoreEmail author
  • Kelly Toppin
  • Linda Young
  • Clifford Spiegelman


When conducting a national survey or census, administrative data may be available that can provide reliable values for some of the variables. Survey and census estimates should be consistent with reliable administrative data. Calibration can be used to improve the estimates by further adjusting the survey weights so that estimates of targeted variables honor bounds obtained from administrative data. The commonly used methods of calibration produce non-integer weights. For the Census of Agriculture, estimates of farms are provided as integers so as to insure consistent estimates at all aggregation levels; thus, the calibrated weights are rounded to integers. The calibration and rounding procedure used for the 2012 Census of Agricultural produced final weights that were substantially different from the survey weights that had been adjusted for under-coverage, non-response, and misclassification. A new method that calibrates and rounds as a single process is provided. The new method produces integer, calibrated weights that tend to be consistent with more calibration targets and are more correlated with the modeled census weights. In addition, the new method is more computationally efficient. Supplementary materials accompanying this paper appear online.


Discrete optimization Coordinate descent Rounding to integers Local minimizer Survey weights estimation Relative errors 

Supplementary material (21.4 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (zip 21877 KB)


  1. Alho, J. M., Mulry, M. H., Wurdeman, K., and Kim, J. (1993). Estimating heterogeneity in the probabilities of enumeration for dual-system estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88(423):1130–1136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alho, J. M. (1990). Logistic regression in capture-recapture models. Biometrics, 46(3):623–635.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Antal, E. and Tillé, Y. (2011). A direct bootstrap method for complex sampling designs from a finite population. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 106(494):534–543.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Cauchy, A. (1847). Méthode générale pour la résolution des systemes déquations simultanées. Comp. Rend. Sci. Paris, 25(1847):536–538.Google Scholar
  5. Cochran, W. G. (1978). Laplace’s ratio estimator. In Contributions to survey sampling and applied statistics, pages 3–10. Elsevier.Google Scholar
  6. Deville, J.-C. (1988). Estimation linaire et redressement sur information auxiliaire d’enqutes par sondage.Google Scholar
  7. Deville, J.-C. and Särndal, C.-E. (1992). Calibration estimators in survey sampling. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 87(418):376–382.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Duchesne, P. (1999). Robust calibration estimators. Survey Survey Methodology, 25:43–56.Google Scholar
  9. Estevao, V. M. and Särndal, C.-E. (2000). A functional form approach to calibration. Journal of Official Statistics, 16(4):379–399.Google Scholar
  10. Fetter, M. (2009). An overview of coverage adjustment for the 2007 census of agriculture. In Proceeding of the Government Statistics Section, JSM, pages 3228–3236.Google Scholar
  11. Fetter, M., Gentle, J., and Perry, C. (2005). Calibration adjustment when not all the targets can be met. In Proceeding of the Survey Research Method section Statistics Section, ASA, pages 3031–3035.Google Scholar
  12. Griffin, R. and Mule, T. (2008). Spurious Events in Dual System Estimation. Technical Report 2010-E-20, United States Department of Commerce, United States Census Bureau, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  13. Henry, K. and Valliant, R. (2012). Methods for adjusting survey weights when estimating a total. Proceedings of the 2012 Federal Committee on Statistical Methodologys Research Conference.Google Scholar
  14. Hogan, H. (1993). The 1990 post-enumeration survey: Operations and results. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88(423):1047–1060.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Horvitz, D. G. and Thompson, D. J. (1952). A generalization of sampling without replacement from a finite universe. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 47(260):663–685.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Kott, P. (2006). Using calibration weights to adjust for nonresponse and coverage errors. Survey Methodology, 32:133–142.Google Scholar
  17. Kott, P. S. (2001). The delete-a-group jackknife. Journal of Official Statistics, 17(4):521.Google Scholar
  18. Kott, P. S. (2004). Collected techincal notes on weighting and its impact to the 2002 census of agriculture. United States Department of Agriculture Report.Google Scholar
  19. Lemel, Y. (1976). Une gnralisation de la mthode du quotient pour le redressement des enqutes par sondage. Annales de l’ins, (22/23):273–282.Google Scholar
  20. Luo, Z. Q. and Tseng, P. (1992). On the convergence of the coordinate descent method for convex differentiable minimization. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 72(1):7–35.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Mashreghi, Z., Haziza, D., Léger, C., et al. (2016). A survey of bootstrap methods in finite population sampling. Statistics Surveys, 10:1–52.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Mule, T. (2008). 2010 Census Coverage Measurement Estimation Methodology. Technical Report 2010-E-18, United States Department of Commerce, United States Census Bureau, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  23. Nutini, J., Schmidt, M., Laradji, I., Friedlander, M., and Koepke, H. (2015). Coordinate descent converges faster with the gauss-southwell rule than random selection. In Bach, F. and Blei, D., editors, Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 37 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 1632–1641, Lille, France. PMLR.Google Scholar
  24. O’Donoghue, E., Hoppe, R. A., Banker, D., and Korb, P. (2009). Exploring alternative farm definitions: implications for agricultural statistics and program eligibility. Economic Information Bulletin-USDA Economic Research Service, 49.Google Scholar
  25. Rao, J. and Singh, A. (1997). A ridge-shrinkage method for range-restricted weight calibration in survey sampling. In Proceedings of the section on survey research methods, pages 57–65. American Statistical Association Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  26. Scholetzky, W. (2000). Evaluation of integer weighting for the 1997 Census of Agriculture. Technical Report RD-00-01, United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  27. Singh, A. and Mohl, C. (1996). Understanding calibration estimators in survey sampling. Survey Methodology, 22(2):107–115.Google Scholar
  28. Southwell, R. V. (1940). Relaxation Methods in Engineering Science—a Treatise On Approximate Computation. Oxford University Press, Oxford.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Théberge, A. (1999). Extension of calibration estimators in survey sampling. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94(446):635–644.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. Théberge, A. (2000). Calibration and restircted weights. Survey Methodology, 26(1):99–107.Google Scholar
  31. Tibshirani, R. (1996). Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 58(1):267–288.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. Tilling, K. and Sterne, J. A. (1999). Capture-recapture models including covariate effects. American journal of epidemiology, 149(4):392–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wright, S. J. (2015). Coordinate descent algorithms. Mathematical Programming, 151(1):3–34.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. Xi, C. S. and Tang, C. Y. (2011). Properties of census dual system population size estimators. International Statistical Review, 79(3):336–361.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. Young, L. J., Lamas, A. C., and Abreu, D. A. (2017). The 2012 Census of Agriculture: a capture–recapture analysis. Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, 22(4):523–539.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. Young, L. J., Lamas, A. C., Abreu, D. A., Wang, S., and Adrian, D. (2013). Statistical methodology for the 2012 us census of agriculture. In the Proceeding 59th ISI World Statistics Congress, pages 1063–1068.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Biometric Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Institute of Statistical SciencesWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.USDA National Agricultural Statistics ServiceWashingtonUSA
  3. 3.Texas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA

Personalised recommendations