← Back to paper list

Citation Analysis

A Method of Moments Approach to Asymptotically Unbiased Synthetic Controls
Joseph Fry
https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.01209
147
Citation mentions
59
Cited references
10
Sections
14,240
Words (approx)

References by Citation Intensity

Ordered by composite index (descending). Higher values indicate more intensive citation.

# Reference Year Mentions Breadth Sec. Wtd Share Composite Main %
1 Abadie, Diamond, and Hainmueller 2010 11 5 18.0 0.075 1.000 100%
2 Ferman 2021 9 4 16.0 0.061 1.000 100%
3 11 3 20.0 0.075 1.000 100%
4 Abadie, Diamond, and Hainmueller 2015 6 3 11.0 0.041 1.000 100%
5 Arkhangelsky, Athey, Hirshberg, Imbens, and Wager 2021 6 4 12.0 0.041 1.000 100%
6 Li 2020 8 5 16.0 0.054 1.000 100%
7 Andrews and Lu 2001 14 3 28.0 0.095 1.000 100%
8 Ferman and Pinto 2021 6 4 9.0 0.041 0.941 83%
9 Chernozhukov, Wüthrich, and Zhu 2021 6 2 12.0 0.041 0.874 100%
10 Shi, Li, Miao, Hu, and Tchetgen 2023 4 2 5.0 0.027 0.811 100%
11 Andrews 2003 4 2 8.0 0.027 0.811 100%
12 Newey and McFadden 1994 3 2 6.0 0.020 0.737 100%
13 Abadie 2021 2 2 3.0 0.014 0.644 100%
14 Kaul, Kl\"obner, Pfeifer, and Schieler 2021 2 2 3.0 0.014 0.644 100%
15 Bai 2009 2 2 3.0 0.014 0.644 100%
16 Xu 2017 2 2 3.0 0.014 0.644 100%
17 Chernozhukov, Wüthrich, and Zhu 2022 2 2 4.0 0.014 0.644 100%
18 Ferman, Pinto, and Possebom 2020 2 1 2.0 0.014 0.511 100%
19 2 1 4.0 0.014 0.511 100%
20 Mehmet Caner and Lee 2018 2 1 4.0 0.014 0.511 100%
21 Hahn and Shi 2017 2 1 4.0 0.014 0.511 100%
22 2 1 4.0 0.014 0.511 100%
23 Zarantonello 1971 2 1 4.0 0.014 0.511 100%
24 Poskitt 2020 2 1 4.0 0.014 0.511 100%
25 Abadie and Gardeazabal 2003 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
26 Hsiao, Steve Ching, and Ki Wan 2012 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
27 Li and Bell 2017 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
28 Masini and Medeiros 2021 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
29 Bai and Ng 2002 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
30 Rockafellar and Wets 1958 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
31 Chamberlain 1984 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
32 Liang and Zeger 1986 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
33 Arellano and Honoré 2001 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
34 Moon and Weidner 2015 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
35 Moon and Weidner 2017 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
36 Pesaran 2006 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
37 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
38 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
39 1 1 1.0 0.007 0.406 100%
40 Botosaru and Ferman 2019 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
41 Agarwal, Shah, and Shen 2023 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
42 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
43 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
44 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
45 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
46 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
47 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
48 Bertrand, Duflo, and Mullainathan 2004 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
49 World Bank National Accounts Data and OECD Nationa... 2023 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
50 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
51 Abadie, Diamond, and Hainmueller 2011 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
52 Feenstra, Inklaar, and Timmer 2023 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
53 Andrews and Guggenberger 2010 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
54 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
55 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
56 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
57 Andrews 2002 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
58 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
59 Politis, Romano, and Wolf 1999 1 1 2.0 0.007 0.406 100%
Measures: Mentions = total in-text citations; Breadth = distinct sections; Sec. Wtd = section-weighted count (body ×2, lit review/appendix ×0.5); Share = mentions / total citations in paper; Composite = geometric mean of normalised count, breadth, and main-text ratio; Main % = fraction of mentions in main text (excl. appendix). (self) = self-citation.

Citation intensity data generated from LaTeX source analysis.