Robust Models in Probability Sampling
Abstract
Summary In the estimation of a population mean or total from a random sample, certain methods based on linear models are known to be automatically design consistent, regardless of how well the underlying model describes the population. A sufficient condition is identified for this type of robustness to model failure; the condition, which we call ‘internal bias calibration’, relates to the combination of a model and the method used to fit it. Included among the internally bias-calibrated models, in addition to the aforementioned linear models, are certain canonical link generalized linear models and nonparametric regressions constructed from them by a particular style of local likelihood fitting. Other models can often be made robust by using a suboptimal fitting method. Thus the class of model-based, but design consistent, analyses is enlarged to include more realistic models for certain types of survey variable such as binary indicators and counts. Particular applications discussed are the estimation of the size of a population subdomain, as arises in tax auditing for example, and the estimation of a bootstrap tail probability.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Identity (5.6) is a case of internal bias calibration studied by Firth and Bennett (1998), which implies (5.7).
“Identity (5.6) is a case of 'internal bias calibration' studied in detail by Firth and Bennett (1998), which then implies”
From Statistical paradises and paradoxes in big data (I): Law of large populations, big data paradox, and the 2016 US presidential election (2018) · cites this paper as Firth and Bennett (1998)
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 26 · Cited by 91
- Authors
- Firth, D., & Bennett, K. E.
- Affiliations
- University of Oxford (GB)
- MRC Institute of Hearing Research (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Firth, D.
- Venue
- Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1998-01-01
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-21
- ISSN
- 1369-7412 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9868
- OpenAlex
- W2097672871
- Cited by
- 91
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 1.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Statistical Methodology) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Survey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Census and Population Estimation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Keywords
- robust estimation, design consistency, model misspecification, linear models, generalized linear models, local likelihood, nonparametric regression, population mean estimation, population total estimation, survey sampling
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