Parameter estimation procedures for exponential-family random graph models on count-valued networks: A comparative simulation study

The exponential-family random graph models (ERGMs) have emerged as an important framework for modeling social networks for a wide variety of relational types. ERGMs for valued networks are less well-developed than their unvalued counterparts, and pose particular computational challenges. Network data with edge values on the non-negative integers (count-valued networks) is an important such case, with examples ranging from the magnitude of migration and trade flows between places to the frequency of interactions and encounters between individuals. Here, we propose an efficient parallelizable subsampled maximum pseudo-likelihood estimation (MPLE) scheme for count-valued ERGMs, and compare its performance with existing Contrastive Divergence (CD) and Monte Carlo Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MCMLE) approaches via a simulation study based on migration flow networks in two U.S. states. Our results suggest that edge value variance is a key factor in method performance, while network size mainly influences their relative merits in computational time. For small-variance networks, all methods perform well in point estimations while CD greatly overestimates uncertainties, and MPLE underestimates them for dependence terms; all methods have fast estimation for small networks, but CD and subsampled multi-core MPLE provides speed advantages as network size increases. For large-variance networks, both MPLE and MCMLE offer high-quality estimates of coefficients and their uncertainty, but MPLE is significantly faster than MCMLE; MPLE is also a better seeding method for MCMLE than CD, as the latter makes MCMLE more prone to convergence failure. The study suggests that MCMLE and MPLE should be the default approach to estimate ERGMs for small-variance and large-variance valued networks, respectively. We also offer further suggestions regarding choice of computational method for valued ERGMs based on data structure, available computational resources and analytical goals.     

On the Failure of the Bootstrap for Matching Estimators

Matching estimators are widely used in empirical economics for the evaluation of programs or treatments. Researchers using matching methods often apply the bootstrap to calculate the standard errors. However, no formal justification has been provided for the use of the bootstrap in this setting. In this article, we show that the standard bootstrap is, in general, not valid for matching estimators, even in the simple case with a single continuous covariate where the estimator is root‐N consistent and asymptotically normally distributed with zero asymptotic bias. Valid inferential methods in this setting are the analytic asymptotic variance estimator of Abadie and Imbens (2006a) as well as certain modifications of the standard bootstrap, like the subsampling methods in Politis and Romano (1994).