arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2608.18973

Don't Drop the Singletons: Efficient Inference for Pairwise Experiments with Independent Attrition

Abstract

Pairwise randomization can yield substantial efficiency gains in experiments. Yet methodological guidance cautions against pairwise randomization, especially in settings with attrition, partly because common practices for estimation (i.e., pair fixed effects) imply discarding data from incomplete pairs thus exacerbating data loss from attrition. This practice of dropping incomplete pairs reduces statistical power of tests as well as precision of estimates, in paired experiments, compared to designs with less finely stratified treatment assignment. We argue that this concern is misplaced if attrition is independent of treatment status and potential outcomes, and that these issues follow from an inefficient use of the data that remains post-attrition. First, we show how, by using a specific permutation test, it is possible to use all observed units for inference (complete pairs and incomplete pairs where one unit attrits) while still exploiting the pairwise randomization design structure. The test procedure we suggest provides exact size control under the sharp null. Second, we study an optimally weighted estimator that efficiently combines within-pair and across-pair comparisons. Finally, we show that combining these two insights yields a test procedure that dominates the two commonly used inference methods (a paired $t$-test and the two-sample $t$-test) in power, for any level of attrition. Usefully for applied researchers, we show that the efficient procedure can be implemented via a weighted fixed effects regression, straightforward in standard software. In sum, our results provide researchers with practical tools for conducting experiments with pairwise randomization without sacrificing observations or statistical power when facing independent attrition.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Simon Heß, Patrick W. Schmidt. 2026-08-19. Don't Drop the Singletons: Efficient Inference for Pairwise Experiments with Independent Attrition. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.18973

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Difference-in-Differences with Unpoolable Data

Difference-in-differences (DID) is commonly used to estimate treatment effects but is infeasible in settings where data are unpoolable due to privacy concerns or legal restrictions on data sharing, particularly across jurisdictions. In this study, we identify and relax the assumption of data poolability in DID estimation. We propose an innovative approach to estimate DID with unpoolable data (UN-DID) which can accommodate covariates, multiple groups, and staggered adoption. Through analytical proofs and Monte Carlo simulations, we show that UN-DID and conventional DID estimates of the average treatment effect and standard errors are equal and unbiased in settings without covariates. With covariates, both methods produce estimates that are unbiased, equivalent, and converge to the true value. The estimates differ slightly but the statistical inference and substantive conclusions remain the same. Two empirical examples with real-world data further underscore UN-DID's utility. The UN-DID method allows the estimation of cross-jurisdictional treatment effects with unpoolable data, enabling better counterfactuals to be used and new research questions to be answered.

econ.EM

The Promise of Time-Series Foundation Models for Agricultural Forecasting: Evidence from Commodity Prices

Forecasting agricultural markets remains challenging due to nonlinear dynamics, structural breaks, and sparse data. A long-standing belief holds that simple time-series methods outperform more advanced alternatives. This paper provides the first systematic evidence that this belief no longer holds with modern time-series foundation models (TSFMs). Using USDA ERS monthly commodity price data from 1997-2025, we evaluate 17 forecasting approaches across four model classes, including traditional time-series, machine learning, deep learning, and five state-of-the-art TSFMs (Chronos, Chronos-2, TimesFM 2.5, Time-MoE, Moirai-2), and construct annual marketing year price predictions to compare with USDA's futures-based season-average price (SAP) forecasts. We show that zero-shot foundation models consistently outperform traditional time-series methods, machine learning, and deep learning architectures trained from scratch in both monthly and annual forecasting. Furthermore, foundation models remarkably outperform USDA's futures-based forecasts on three of four major commodities despite USDA's information advantage from forward-looking futures markets. Time-MoE delivers the largest accuracy gains, achieving 54.9% improvement on wheat and 18.5% improvement on corn relative to USDA ERS benchmarks on recent data (2017-2024 excluding COVID). These results point to a paradigm shift in agricultural forecasting.

econ.EM

Testing for Monotone Equilibrium Strategies in Games of Incomplete Information

This paper develops a unified framework for testing monotonicity of Bayesian Nash equilibrium strategies in unobserved types in games of incomplete information. We show that, under symmetric independent private types, monotonicity of differentiable equilibrium strategies is equivalent to monotonicity of a quasi-inverse strategy identified from observed actions. This allows the problem to be reformulated as testing a countable set of moment inequalities involving unconditional expectations. We propose a Cramer-von Mises-type statistic with bootstrap critical values. The method accommodates covariates and game heterogeneity. Monte Carlo simulations demonstrate finite-sample performance, and an application to procurement auctions illustrates cartel detection.

econ.EM