Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,461

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Goodness of Fit and Related Inference Processes for Quantile Regression

Koenker, Roger, Machado, José A. F.·1999·Journal of the American Statistical Association

Abstract

We introduce a goodness-of-fit process for quantile regression analogous to the conventional R2 statistic of least squares regression. Several related inference processes designed to test composite hypotheses about the combined effect of several covariates over an entire range of conditional quantile functions are also formulated. The asymptotic behavior of the inference processes is shown to be closely related to earlier p-sample goodness-of-fit theory involving Bessel processes. The approach is illustrated with some hypothetical examples, an application to recent empirical models of international economic growth, and some Monte Carlo evidence.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01621459.1999.10473882

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Koenker, R., & Machado, J. A. F.
Venue
Journal of the American Statistical Association
Published
1999-12
Volume
94
Issue
448
Pages
1296-1310
ISSN
  • 0162-1459 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-274X
OpenAlex
W2118711140
Cited by
1,461
References
0
FWCI
6.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.