, Volume 28, Issue 4, pp 1082–1086 | Cite as

Comments on: Deville and Särndal’s calibration: revisiting a 25 years old successful optimization problem

  • Changbao WuEmail author
  • Shixiao Zhang


We provide a brief discussion on the development of model calibration techniques and optimal calibration estimation in survey sampling and its relation to Deville and Särndal’s calibration, and applications of model calibration to missing data problems for robust inference.


Complete auxiliary information Double robustness Missing at random Multiple robustness Nonlinear models Optimal estimation 

Mathematics Subject Classification




This research is supported by a Grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. We are grateful to the invitation from the Co-Editor Lola Ugarte to join the discussion and to celebrate an important methodological advance in statistics for the past 25 years.


This work was funded by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Grant Number 50503-10487).


  1. Chen J, Sitter RR (1999) A pseudo empirical likelihood approach to the effective use of auxiliary information in complex surveys. Stat Sin 9:385–406MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Chen J, Wu C (2002) Estimation of distribution function and quantiles using the model-calibrated pseudo empirical likelihood method. Stat Sin 12:1223–1239MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen S, Haziza D (2017) Multiply robust imputation procedures for the treatment of item nonresponse in surveys. Biometrika 104:439–453MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen J, Sitter RR, Wu C (2002) Using empirical likelihood methods to obtain range restricted weights in regression estimators for surveys. Biometrika 89:230–237MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Deville JC, Särndal CE (1992) Calibration estimators in survey sampling. J Am Stat Assoc 87:376–382MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Han P (2014) Multiply robust estimation in regression analysis with missing data. J Am Stat Assoc 109:1159–1173MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Han P (2016) Combining inverse probability weighting and multiple imputation to improve robustness of estimation. Scand J Stat 43:246–260MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Han P, Wang L (2013) Estimation with missing data: beyond double robustness. Biometrika 100:417–430MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Montanari GE, Ranalli MG (2005) Nonparametric model calibration estimation in survey sampling. J Am Stat Assoc 100:1429–1442MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Owen A (1988) Empirical likelihood ratio confidence intervals for a single functional. Biometrika 75:237–249MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Sitter RR, Wu C (2002) Efficient estimation of quadratic finite population functions in the presence of auxiliary information. J Am Stat Assoc 97:535–543MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Wu C (1999) The effective use of complete auxiliary information from survey data. Ph.D. Dissertation, Simon Fraser University, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  13. Wu C (2003) Optimal calibration estimators in survey sampling. Biometrika 90:935–951MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. Wu C, Sitter RR (2001) A model-calibration approach to using complete auxiliary information from survey data. J Am Stat Assoc 96:185–193MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Wu C, Luan Y (2003) Optimal calibration estimators under two-phase sampling. J Off Stat 19:119–131Google Scholar
  16. Wu C, Lu WW (2016) Calibration weighting methods for complex surveys. Int Stat Rev 84:79–98MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Zhang S, Han P, Wu C (2019a) A unified empirical likelihood approach to testing MCAR and subsequent estimation. Scand J Stat 46:272–288MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Zhang S, Han P, Wu C (2019b) Empirical likelihood inference for non-randomized pretest–posttest studies with missing data. Electron J Stat 13:2012–2042MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Statistics and Actuarial ScienceUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  2. 2.Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research CenterSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations