Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comments on: Deville and Särndal’s calibration: revisiting a 25 years old successful optimization problem

  • Discussion
  • Published:
TEST Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We provide a brief discussion on the development of model calibration techniques and optimal calibration estimation in survey sampling and its relation to Deville and Särndal’s calibration, and applications of model calibration to missing data problems for robust inference.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Chen J, Sitter RR (1999) A pseudo empirical likelihood approach to the effective use of auxiliary information in complex surveys. Stat Sin 9:385–406

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Chen J, Wu C (2002) Estimation of distribution function and quantiles using the model-calibrated pseudo empirical likelihood method. Stat Sin 12:1223–1239

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Chen S, Haziza D (2017) Multiply robust imputation procedures for the treatment of item nonresponse in surveys. Biometrika 104:439–453

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Chen J, Sitter RR, Wu C (2002) Using empirical likelihood methods to obtain range restricted weights in regression estimators for surveys. Biometrika 89:230–237

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Deville JC, Särndal CE (1992) Calibration estimators in survey sampling. J Am Stat Assoc 87:376–382

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Han P (2014) Multiply robust estimation in regression analysis with missing data. J Am Stat Assoc 109:1159–1173

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Han P (2016) Combining inverse probability weighting and multiple imputation to improve robustness of estimation. Scand J Stat 43:246–260

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Han P, Wang L (2013) Estimation with missing data: beyond double robustness. Biometrika 100:417–430

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Montanari GE, Ranalli MG (2005) Nonparametric model calibration estimation in survey sampling. J Am Stat Assoc 100:1429–1442

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Owen A (1988) Empirical likelihood ratio confidence intervals for a single functional. Biometrika 75:237–249

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sitter RR, Wu C (2002) Efficient estimation of quadratic finite population functions in the presence of auxiliary information. J Am Stat Assoc 97:535–543

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Wu C (1999) The effective use of complete auxiliary information from survey data. Ph.D. Dissertation, Simon Fraser University, Canada

  • Wu C (2003) Optimal calibration estimators in survey sampling. Biometrika 90:935–951

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Wu C, Sitter RR (2001) A model-calibration approach to using complete auxiliary information from survey data. J Am Stat Assoc 96:185–193

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Wu C, Luan Y (2003) Optimal calibration estimators under two-phase sampling. J Off Stat 19:119–131

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu C, Lu WW (2016) Calibration weighting methods for complex surveys. Int Stat Rev 84:79–98

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang S, Han P, Wu C (2019a) A unified empirical likelihood approach to testing MCAR and subsequent estimation. Scand J Stat 46:272–288

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang S, Han P, Wu C (2019b) Empirical likelihood inference for non-randomized pretest–posttest studies with missing data. Electron J Stat 13:2012–2042

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research is supported by a Grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. We are grateful to the invitation from the Co-Editor Lola Ugarte to join the discussion and to celebrate an important methodological advance in statistics for the past 25 years.

Funding

This work was funded by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Grant Number 50503-10487).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada

    Changbao Wu

  2. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, 98109-1024, USA

    Shixiao Zhang

Authors
  1. Changbao Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shixiao Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Changbao Wu.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This comment refers to the invited paper available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11749-019-00681-3.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, C., Zhang, S. Comments on: Deville and Särndal’s calibration: revisiting a 25 years old successful optimization problem. TEST 28, 1082–1086 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11749-019-00682-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11749-019-00682-2

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Search

Navigation