agentsclimarketplace

Jpube data analysis

Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/Journal-of-Public-Economics-Skills/skills/jpube-data-analysis

Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. | 覆盖主流期刊的 Claude Code/Codex 期刊技能包,从选题、识别策略到表格规范与审稿回复全流程,助你快速发论文。

Install
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill jpube-data-analysis

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Use when handling the empirical analysis for a Journal of Public Economics (JPubE) manuscript — administrative tax/transfer/health/register data, elasticity and bunching estimation, sufficient-statistics and MVPF calculations, heterogeneity, and robustness. Executes the analysis plan; for the causal design itself use jpube-identification-strategy.

SKILL.md

6.9 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Data Analysis (jpube-data-analysis)

When to trigger

  • You are estimating a behavioral elasticity, take-up rate, or moral-hazard parameter
  • The analysis uses administrative or register microdata with disclosure constraints
  • You need to map estimates into welfare (DWL, MVPF, sufficient statistics)
  • Robustness, heterogeneity, or measurement concerns are unresolved

What JPubE analysis looks like

Public economics at JPubE is typically built on large administrative or register data — tax records (IRS/SOI), social-insurance files (UI/DI/SSA), health-program data (Medicaid/CMS), or whole-population European registers — because credible policy elasticities need population-scale variation around kinks, notches, and reform dates. The analysis should convert clean identification into a policy-relevant quantity, not stop at a coefficient.

Analysis norms

  • Estimate the policy parameter directly. Recover the taxable-income / labor-supply elasticity, the take-up or crowd-out rate, or the insurance-vs.-moral-hazard wedge that the welfare argument needs.
  • Sufficient statistics & MVPF. Where you claim a welfare verdict, show the mapping from estimated responses to the formula explicitly, state the primitives held fixed, and propagate standard errors (delta method or bootstrap) into the welfare object.
  • Respect disclosure and licensing. Restricted tax/health/register data require formal access and output clearance; document cell-size suppression and the access path, and supply programs even when microdata cannot be shared.
  • Measurement honesty. Top-coding, income definitions, real-vs.-nominal, and program-rule coding drive public-finance results; document each choice.
  • Heterogeneity that matters for policy. By income, eligibility margin, or jurisdiction — heterogeneity is the input to optimal nonlinear policy, not a fishing expedition.
  • Robustness. Bin width and excluded region (bunching), bandwidth (RD/RKD), estimator choice (staggered DID), functional form, and sensitivity of the welfare conclusion to key elasticities.

Execution bridge (StatsPAI / Stata MCP)

Run the battery, don't just enumerate it. Full map: execution-with-mcp. JPubE is public economics — tax/transfer/program designs; DiD/IV/RDD and bunching are central, magnitudes in policy units.

  • Many outcomes / specifications: romano_wolf (step-down FWER) or benjamini_hochberg.
  • OVB sensitivity: oster_delta / sensemakr.
  • Inference: wild_cluster_bootstrap (few clusters), twoway_cluster / conley.
  • Re-fit off one handle: audit_result(result_id) lists missing checks + the exact suggest_function for each.
  • Exhibits: etable / did_summary_to_latex from the handle — no retyped numbers.

Decisive checks in the body, exhaustive battery in the appendix. JF execution walkthrough.

Checklist

  • The estimated object is the parameter the welfare claim needs
  • Sufficient-statistics / MVPF mapping shown with primitives stated and SEs propagated
  • Data access, licensing, and disclosure (cell suppression) documented
  • Income / program-rule / top-coding definitions stated and tested
  • Heterogeneity tied to a policy margin, not data-mined
  • Robustness covers the design-specific tuning parameters
  • The welfare conclusion's sensitivity to key elasticities is reported

Anti-patterns

  • Reporting a regression coefficient and never converting it to a welfare quantity
  • An MVPF / sufficient-statistic number with no standard error or sensitivity analysis
  • Ignoring disclosure rules when describing restricted administrative data
  • Subgroup splits with no multiple-testing discipline presented as "heterogeneity"

Worked example: from elasticity to a welfare number (illustrative)

A DI-reform evaluation recovers a labor-supply response to a benefit cut, then builds the MVPF: the mechanical fiscal saving is the denominator; the behavioral fiscal externality (induced earnings → recovered taxes, minus crowd-out) adjusts the numerator, giving MVPF ≈ 0.8 (illustrative). The skill's norms then bind: state the primitives held fixed (no GE wage response, fixed program rules); propagate the elasticity's SE through the MVPF by the delta method, reporting a CI on the welfare object; and show how MVPF moves if the key elasticity sits at the high or low end of the literature. The welfare statistic with its uncertainty — not the bare elasticity — is the deliverable.

Calibration table: estimate → welfare object

Estimated objectWelfare mappingWatch for
Taxable-income elasticityMarginal DWL / optimal top rateMean reversion, income shifting
Take-up / benefit responseMVPF numerator + denominatorCrowd-out onto other programs

Evidence pass for Journal of Public Economics

Treat this skill as an executable review pass, not a prose hint. First lock the policy instrument, affected margin, identification design, and welfare or incidence interpretation; then judge whether the current manuscript answers the venue's real reader: public economists who ask whether policy design, fiscal incidence, or welfare interpretation is credible.

  • Do the pass: Audit the research design before polishing prose: unit of analysis, comparison set, uncertainty, sensitivity, missingness, and reproducibility must be visible.
  • Return a ledger: give claim / evidence / risk / manuscript location rows, so the next agent can edit rather than rediscover the issue.
  • Sibling guard: compare against JDE for development policy, JIE for cross-border policy, AEJ Economic Policy for broad policy readership; if a sibling owns the contribution, recommend re-routing before polishing format.
  • Stop condition: do not give submission-ready advice until the pack's resources/official-source-map.md has been checked for volatile rules and the manuscript has one concrete fix for the largest venue-specific risk.

Output format

【Data】source + restricted? + disclosure handled? [Y/N]
【Policy parameter】elasticity / take-up / crowd-out / moral-hazard wedge
【Welfare mapping】DWL / MVPF / sufficient stat — SEs propagated? [Y/N]
【Measurement choices】[income def, top-coding, rule coding, ...]
【Heterogeneity】policy margin: [...]
【Robustness done】[bin/bandwidth/estimator/sensitivity, ...]
【Next step】jpube-tables-figures

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.