Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,234 studies31 sourcesUpdated 39 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Axioms

Bias-Corrected Empirical-Likelihood Inference for Single-Index Expectile Regression Under Missing-at-Random Responses

  1. 1School of Science, Xi’an Polytechnic University, Xi’an 710048, China

Abstract

We study bias-corrected empirical-likelihood inference for single-index expectile regression when responses are missing at random. Local-linear expectile estimation is combined with conditional centering to construct three procedures based on complete cases, inverse-probability weighting, and cross-fitted imputation. The expectile score is continuous and globally Lipschitz, which permits the bias-correction argument without further smoothing of the score. Under the stated conditions, the index estimators are asymptotically normal and each empirical-likelihood ratio has a standard chi-squared limit. Joint confidence regions can therefore be formed without estimating the limiting covariance matrix. For the imputation construction considered here, I-BCEL and CC-BCEL have the same first-order limiting covariance. In the simulations, the estimation error decreases with sample size; differences among the incomplete-data methods are more apparent when the missing-response rate is 40%, where small-sample undercoverage also remains. An analysis of the New York air-quality data illustrates the three procedures with naturally missing responses.

Related

  1. Renewable Online Expectile Regression for Heterogeneous Streaming Data with Abnormal Batches
    Wei Cao, Shanshan Wang
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textStatisticsarXiv
  2. Likelihood-Free Inference in High-Dimensional Models
    Athanasios Kousathanas, Christoph Leuenberger, Jonas Helfer +3
    GeneticsPeer-reviewedLicence not stated22 citedStatisticsHAL
  3. Unrestricted conditional maximum likelihood estimation for a Fréchet regression model
    Marcio Reverbel, Johan Segers
    arXivPreprintarXiv licenceFull textStatisticsarXiv
  4. Reliable Scale-Free Bandits via Empirical Likelihood
    Pratham Gupta, Alhad Sethi, Shubhada Agrawal
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textStatisticsarXiv
  5. Existence and consistency of weighted maximum likelihood estimator for extreme quantile regression
    Lucien M. Vidagbandji, Alexandre Berred, Cyrille Bertelle +1
    HALPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textProbabilityStatisticsHALarXiv
BibTeX
@article{liu2026biascorrected,
  title = {{Bias-Corrected Empirical-Likelihood Inference for Single-Index Expectile Regression Under Missing-at-Random Responses}},
  author = {Pingping Liu and Shuanghua Luo and Junxiang Lu},
  journal = {Axioms},
  year = {2026},
  month = nov,
  doi = {10.3390/axioms15110816},
  url = {https://www.mdpi.com/2075-1680/15/11/816},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Bias-Corrected Empirical-Likelihood Inference for Single-Index Expectile Regression Under Missing-at-Random Responses
AU  - Pingping Liu
AU  - Shuanghua Luo
AU  - Junxiang Lu
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/11/02
JO  - Axioms
DO  - 10.3390/axioms15110816
UR  - https://www.mdpi.com/2075-1680/15/11/816
AB  - We study bias-corrected empirical-likelihood inference for single-index expectile regression when responses are missing at random. Local-linear expectile estimation is combined with conditional centering to construct three procedures based on complete cases, inverse-probability weighting, and cross-fitted imputation. The expectile score is continuous and globally Lipschitz, which permits the bias-correction argument without further smoothing of the score. Under the stated conditions, the index estimators are asymptotically normal and each empirical-likelihood ratio has a standard chi-squared limit. Joint confidence regions can therefore be formed without estimating the limiting covariance matrix. For the imputation construction considered here, I-BCEL and CC-BCEL have the same first-order limiting covariance. In the simulations, the estimation error decreases with sample size; differences among the incomplete-data methods are more apparent when the missing-response rate is 40%, where small-sample undercoverage also remains. An analysis of the New York air-quality data illustrates the three procedures with naturally missing responses.
SN  - 2075-1680
ER  -