Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Negative weights #503

Open
lbittarello opened this issue Dec 30, 2021 · 1 comment
Open

Negative weights #503

lbittarello opened this issue Dec 30, 2021 · 1 comment

Comments

@lbittarello
Copy link
Member

Is there a reason for which we forbid negative weights (ref)? Some IV weighting schemes use negative weights to isolate compliers.

@lorentzenchr
Copy link
Contributor

I know of 3 reasons:

  • Pretty much any statical interpretation of weights requires them to be non-negative, e.g. aggregated observations/frequency weights define a weighted CDF and a CDF must map to [0, 1].
  • The optimization problem might become non-convex, even for canonical log-link combinations.
    Note that with only a few negative weights, the opt problem might still be well defined.
  • If one uses a true IRLS solver, the LS step takes the square root of the weights.

I also know of one real use case for negative weights:

  • In particle physics, one sometimes simulates particles (reactions/interactions) and then assigns negative weights to some simulations (rows) such that the overall probabilities are well calibrated.

I could imagine an option check_for_negative-weights with default True.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants