Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

On the Effect of Bias Estimation on Coverage Accuracy in Nonparametric Inference

Sebastián Calónico, Matias D. Cattaneo, Max H. FarrellPublished Mar 9, 2017
DOI Publisher
Researcher verdict
Context only
Use as context only
Benchmark evidence
Missing
Not verified yet
Time to first repro
A few days
Plan setup time
Risk flags
1
Review before use

Abstract

Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.

Nonparametric methods play a central role in modern empirical work. While they provide inference procedures that are more robust to parametric misspecification bias, they may be quite sensitive to tuning parameter choices. We study the effects of bias correction on confidence interval coverage in the context of kernel density and local polynomial regression estimation, and prove that bias correction can be preferred to undersmoothing for minimizing coverage error and increasing robustness to tuning parameter choice. This is achieved using a novel, yet simple, Studentization, which leads to a new way of constructing kernel-based bias-corrected confidence intervals. In addition, for practical cases, we derive coverage error optimal bandwidths and discuss easy-to-implement bandwidth selectors. For interior points, we show that the mean-squared error (MSE)-optimal bandwidth for the original point estimator (before bias correction) delivers the fastest coverage error decay rate after bias correction when second-order (equivalent) kernels are employed, but is otherwise suboptimal because it is too “large.” Finally, for odd-degree local polynomial regression, we show that, as with point estimation, coverage error adapts to boundary points automatically when appropriate Studentization is used; however, the MSE-optimal bandwidth for the original point estimator is suboptimal. All the results are established using valid Edgeworth expansions and illustrated with simulated data. Our findings have important consequences for empirical work as they indicate that bias-corrected confidence intervals, coupled with appropriate standard errors, have smaller coverage error and are less sensitive to tuning parameter choices in practically relevant cases where additional smoothness is available. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

Results and benchmarks

Freshness tier: cold
Nonparametric methods play a central role in modern empirical work.

Implementation

No direct implementation yet

Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.

Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.

Implementation evidence summary
Confidence: low

sayantann11/all-classification-templetes-for-ML is the closest maintained adjacent implementation (Matches contextual method/domain keyword: estimation). It is not paper-verified; validate algorithm and evaluation setup against the paper before trusting reported metrics. Community adoption signal: 297 GitHub stars.

Reproduction risks
  • Adjacent implementations are not paper-verified
  • Recommended repository is adjacent and not paper-verified.
  • Adjacent implementation match confidence is low.

Reproduction readiness

Time to first repro: days
Last checked: Aug 24, 2026

No repo

No verified implementation available

  • No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.

Hardware requirements

  • Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.

Repositories and ecosystem

Closest related implementations

These are not paper-verified. Use them as reference points when no direct implementation is available.

No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.

Hugging Face artifacts

No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.

Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.

Research context

352

Citations

53

References

Tasks

Nonparametric statistics, Inference, Econometrics, Statistics, Causal inference, Estimation, Computer science, Statistics and Probability

Methods

None detected

Domains

Mathematics

Evaluation and human feedback data

Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.

Open in HFEPX
Explore similar papers

Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.