Auxiliary Information and Its Implication in Indirect Method of Domain Estimation

Shreya Agarwal¹ , Sarla Pareek² , Piyush Kant Rai³

Section:Research Paper, Product Type: Journal-Paper
Vol.7 , Issue.3 , pp.89-92, Jun-2020

Online published on Jun 30, 2020

Copyright © Shreya Agarwal, Sarla Pareek, Piyush Kant Rai . This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
 

View this paper at   Google Scholar | DPI Digital Library

XML View     PDF Download

How to Cite this Paper

Abstract :
The governmental studies regularly provide precise measurements to large domain. The issue begins when we talk about the exact insights for the sub population called ?domains ". The quantity of perceptions that happen to fall in the domain is customarily arbitrary and in some cases small. These are the highlights that give domain estimation its specific flavor. To expand the effectiveness of assessments for small domains in which the example estimate is small, assistant factors from authoritative records are domain estimation in factual writing are for the most part plan and model based and assistant variable have extraordinary effect in the advancement of aberrant strategy for domain estimation under above said condition. The present paper portrays the utilization of two auxiliary variables in different proposed estimators for domains which are plan and model based. Likewise, a recreated work is done to think about the proficiency of various proposed estimators under two assistant factors as far as absolute relative bias ( (ARB) and Simulated Relative Standard Error (SRSE) for various domains.

Key-Words / Index Term :
Auxiliary variables, Domain estimation, Indirect method of domain estimation

References :
[1] Rai, P.K. and Pandey, K.K.(2013). Synthetic estimators using Auxiliary information in small domains. Statistics in Transition-new series, spring 2013. Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 31 - 44.
[2] Pandey, K.K. and Tikkiwal, G.c.(2010). Generalized class of synthetic estimators for small domains under synthetiv sampling scheme.Statistics in Transition-new series, july 2010. Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 75 ? 89
[3] Tikkiwal,G.C.and pandey, K.K.(2007). On synthetic and composite stimators for small domain estimation under lahiri-midzuno sampling scheme.Statistics in Transition-new series, april 2007. Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 111 ? 123
[4] Tikkiwal,G.C.and Ghiya, A.(2000). A generalized class of synthetic estimators with application to crop acreage estimation for small domains.Biometrical Journal. Vol. 7, pp. 865 - 876.
[5] Noel J. Purcell and Leslie Kish(1979)Estimation for small domains.Biometrics,Jun., 1979, Vol. 35, No. 2 , pp. 365-384.
[6] Gonzalez, M. E. and Waksberg, J. (1973).Estimation of the error of synthetic estimates.paper presented at first meeting of the International association of survey statisticians,august 1973, Vienna, Austria, pp.18-25.
[7] Cochran, W.G. (1977).Sampling Techniques,Wiley & Sons. Singh, D. and Chaudhary, F.S.(1986). Theory and Analysis of Sample Survey Design.Wiley Eastern Limited..
[8] Lessler, J. T., and Kalsbeek, W. D. (1992) Nonsampling Error in Surveys, Wiley, New York.
[9] Small, R. J. (1986) Survey Nonresponse Adjustments for Estimates of Means, International Statistical Review, 54, 139-157.
[10] Madow, W. G., Nisselson, H., and Olkin, I. (Editors) (1983) Incomplete data in sample surveys, Volume 2 Theory and Bibliographies, Academic Press, New York.
[11] Montaquila, J. M., Brick, J. M., Hagedorn, M. C., Kennedy, C., and Keeter, S. (2008) Aspects of Nonresponse Bias in RDD Telephone Surveys, Chapter 25, In: J. M. Lepkowski.
[12] H. L., and Scheuren, F. J. (1983) Weighting Adjustment for Unit Nonresponse, Chapter 13, In: W. G. Madow, H. Nisselson, and I. Olkin (eds.): ?Incomplete data in sample surveys, Volume 2 Theory and Bibliographies?, Academic Press, New York, 143-184.
[13] Rizzo, L., Kalton, G., and Brick, J. M. (1996) A Comparison of Some Weighting Adjustment Methods for Panel Nonresponse, Survey Methodology, 22 (1), 43-53.