This paper combines extreme value theory for the smallest and largest k observations for some given k>1 with a normal approximation for the average of the remaining observations to construct a more robust alternative to the usual t-test. The new test is found to control size much more successfully in small samples compared to existing methods. This holds for the canonical inference for the mean problem based on an i.i.d. sample, but also when comparing two population means and when conducting inference about linear regression coefficients with clustered standard errors.

Suppose estimating a model on each of a small number of potentially heterogeneous clusters yields approximately independent, unbiased, and Gaussian parameter estimators. We make two contributions in this setup. First, we show how to compare a scalar parameter of interest between treatment and control units using a two-sample t-statistic, extending previous results for the one-sample t-statistic. Second, we develop a test for the appropriate level of clustering; it tests the null hypothesis that clustered standard errors from a much finer partition are correct. We illustrate the approach by revisiting empirical studies involving clustered, time series, and spatially correlated data.

Standard extreme value theory implies that the distribution of the largest observations of a large cross section is well approximated by a parametric model, governed by a location, scale and shape parameter. The extremes of a panel of independent cross sections are all governed by the same parameters as long as the underlying distribution as well as the size of the cross sections are time invariant. We derive inference about these parameters, and tests of the null hypothesis of time invariance, under asymptotics that do not require the number of extremes or the number of time periods to increase. We further apply Hamiltonian Monte Carlo techniques to estimate the path of time-varying parameters. We illustrate the approach in four examples of U.S. data: damages from weather-related disasters, financial returns, city sizes and firm sizes.

We develop a Bayesian latent factor model of the joint long-run evolution of GDP per capita for 113 countries over the 118 years from 1900 to 2017. We find considerable heterogeneity in rates of convergence, including rates for some countries that are so slow that they might not converge (or diverge) in century-long samples, and a sparse correlation pattern (“convergence clubs”) between countries. The joint Bayesian structure allows us to compute a joint predictive distribution for the output paths of these countries over the next 100 years. This predictive distribution can be used for simulations requiring projections into the deep future, such as estimating the costs of climate change. The model's pooling of information across countries results in tighter prediction intervals than are achieved using univariate information sets. Still, even using more than a century of data on many countries, the 100-year growth paths exhibit very wide uncertainty.