Simulation evaluation of emerging estimation techniques for multinomial probit models

Citation data:

Journal of Choice Modelling, ISSN: 1755-5345, Vol: 23, Page: 9-20

Publication Year:
2017
Usage 18
Abstract Views 17
Link-outs 1
Captures 12
Readers 11
Exports-Saves 1
Social Media 192
Shares, Likes & Comments 192
Citations 1
Citation Indexes 1
DOI:
10.1016/j.jocm.2017.01.007
Author(s):
Priyadarshan N. Patil; Subodh K. Dubey; Abdul R. Pinjari; Elisabetta Cherchi; Ricardo Daziano; Chandra R. Bhat
Publisher(s):
Elsevier BV
Tags:
Mathematics; Decision Sciences
article description
A simulation evaluation is presented to compare alternative estimation techniques for a five-alternative multinomial probit (MNP) model with random parameters, including cross-sectional and panel datasets and for scenarios with and without correlation among random parameters. The different estimation techniques assessed are: (1) The maximum approximate composite marginal likelihood (MACML) approach; (2) The Geweke-Hajivassiliou-Keane (GHK) simulator with Halton sequences, implemented in conjunction with the composite marginal likelihood (CML) estimation approach; (3) The GHK approach with sparse grid nodes and weights, implemented in conjunction with the composite marginal likelihood (CML) estimation approach; and (4) a Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) approach. In addition, for comparison purposes, the GHK simulator with Halton sequences was implemented in conjunction with the traditional, full information maximum likelihood approach as well. The results indicate that the MACML approach provided the best performance in terms of the accuracy and precision of parameter recovery and estimation time for all data generation settings considered in this study. For panel data settings, the GHK approach with Halton sequences, when combined with the CML approach, provided better performance than when implemented with the full information maximum likelihood approach, albeit not better than the MACML approach. The sparse grid approach did not perform well in recovering the parameters as the dimension of integration increased, particularly so with the panel datasets. The Bayesian MCMC approach performed well in datasets without correlations among random parameters, but exhibited limitations in datasets with correlated parameters.