Citation Analysis – Weak instrumental variables due to nonlinearities in panel data: A Super Learner Control Function estimator

Weak instrumental variables due to nonlinearities in panel data: A Super Learner Control Function estimator
Monika Avila Marquez
https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.03228

Citation mentions

Cited references

Sections

6,149

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	Emmenegger, C. and P. Buhlmann	2023	9	5	16.5	0.209	1.000	100%
2	Chernozhukov, V., D. Chetverikov, M. Demirer, E. D...	2018	3	3	4.5	0.070	0.843	100%
3	Van der Laan, M. J., E. C. Polley, and A. E. Hubba...	2007	3	2	5.0	0.070	0.737	100%
4	Deryugina, T., G. Heutel, N. H. Miller, D. Molitor...	2019	3	2	6.0	0.070	0.737	100%
5	Guo, Z., M. Zheng, and P. Buhlmann	2022	3	2	6.0	0.070	0.737	100%
6	Zabrocki, L., A. Alari, and T. Benmarhnia	2022	2	2	3.0	0.047	0.644	100%
7	Baltagi, B. H., D. Li, et al	2002	2	2	2.5	0.047	0.644	100%
8	Robinson, P. M	1988	2	2	2.5	0.047	0.644	100%
9	Newey, W. K. and D. McFadden	1994	2	2	4.0	0.047	0.644	100%
10	Cai, Z., Y. Fang, and H. Li	2012	2	1	2.0	0.047	0.511	100%
11	Keane, M. P. and T. Neal	2024	1	1	1.0	0.023	0.406	100%
12	Klosin, S. and M. Vilgalys	2022	1	1	1.0	0.023	0.406	100%
13	Semenova, V., M. Goldman, V. Chernozhukov, and M. ...	2023	1	1	1.0	0.023	0.406	100%
14	Cai, Z., Y. Fang, and J. Su	2012	1	1	1.0	0.023	0.406	100%
15	Rodriguez-Poo, J. M. and A. Soberon	2017	1	1	0.5	0.023	0.406	100%
16	Li, Q	1996	1	1	0.5	0.023	0.406	100%
17	Young, E. H. and R. D. Shah	2024	1	1	0.5	0.023	0.406	100%
18	Gilraine, M. and A. Zheng	2022	1	1	2.0	0.023	0.406	100%
19	Deryugina, T. and J. Reif	2023	1	1	2.0	0.023	0.406	100%
20	Wooldridge, J. M	2010	1	1	2.0	0.023	0.406	100%
21	Avila Marquez, M. and J. Kirshnakumar (self)		1	1	2.0	0.023	0.406	100%
22	Fahle, E. M., D. Kalogrides, B. R. Shear, S. F. Re...	2024	1	1	2.0	0.023	0.406	100%

Reference

Year

Mentions

Breadth

Sec. Wtd

Composite

Main %

Emmenegger, C. and P. Buhlmann

2023

16.5

0.209

1.000

100%

Chernozhukov, V., D. Chetverikov, M. Demirer, E. D...

2018

4.5

0.070

0.843

100%

Van der Laan, M. J., E. C. Polley, and A. E. Hubba...

2007

5.0

0.070

0.737

100%

Deryugina, T., G. Heutel, N. H. Miller, D. Molitor...

2019

6.0

0.070

0.737

100%

Guo, Z., M. Zheng, and P. Buhlmann

2022

6.0

0.070

0.737

100%

Zabrocki, L., A. Alari, and T. Benmarhnia

2022

3.0

0.047

0.644

100%

Baltagi, B. H., D. Li, et al

2002

2.5

0.047

0.644

100%

Robinson, P. M

1988

2.5

0.047

0.644

100%

Newey, W. K. and D. McFadden

1994

4.0

0.047

0.644

100%

Cai, Z., Y. Fang, and H. Li

2012

2.0

0.047

0.511

100%

Keane, M. P. and T. Neal

2024

1.0

0.023

0.406

100%

Klosin, S. and M. Vilgalys

2022

1.0

0.023

0.406

100%

Semenova, V., M. Goldman, V. Chernozhukov, and M. ...

2023

1.0

0.023

0.406

100%

Cai, Z., Y. Fang, and J. Su

2012

1.0

0.023

0.406

100%

Rodriguez-Poo, J. M. and A. Soberon

2017

0.5

0.023

0.406

100%

Li, Q

1996

0.5

0.023

0.406

100%

Young, E. H. and R. D. Shah

2024

0.5

0.023

0.406

100%

Gilraine, M. and A. Zheng

2022

2.0

0.023

0.406

100%

Deryugina, T. and J. Reif

2023

2.0

0.023

0.406

100%

Wooldridge, J. M

2010

2.0

0.023

0.406

100%

Avila Marquez, M. and J. Kirshnakumar (self)

2.0

0.023

0.406

100%

Fahle, E. M., D. Kalogrides, B. R. Shear, S. F. Re...

2024

2.0

0.023

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.