Skills DirectorySkills Directory
SkillsLearnSecurityCategoriesDocsCommunityBlog
Sign InSubmit Skill
Skills Directory

Security-tested agent skills for Claude, coding agents, and AI workflows.

Directory

  • Browse Skills
  • All Skills A–Z
  • Claude Skills
  • Claude Code Skills
  • Agent Skills
  • Categories
  • Authors
  • Submit a Skill

Learn

  • Learn Hub
  • Install Claude Skills
  • Write SKILL.md
  • Skills vs MCP
  • Directories Compared

Security

  • Security
  • Methodology
  • Secure Claude Skills
  • Security Badges

Company

  • About
  • Community
  • Blog
  • API Docs
  • Advertise

2026 Skills Directory. All rights reserved.

ProTermsPrivacyRefunds
Back to skills

Ecta Identification

ASecurity

Use when the bottleneck is identification and inference for an Econometrica manuscript — identification conditions and asymptotic distribution theory for an estimator, or axioms and existence/uniqueness for a theory model. Stress-tests the formal foundations before the proofs and simulations are written.

1,052 stars
0 votes
0 copies
0 views
Added 6/5/2026
ai-agentsrust

Security Analysis

A100/100

Scanned 6/5/2026

Install to Claude Code

$npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill ecta-identification --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Ecta Identification?

Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Ecta Identification
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/brycewang-stanford-ecta-identification/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-ecta-identification)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.

Download with Pro
Files
SKILL.md
---
name: ecta-identification
description: Use when the bottleneck is identification and inference for an Econometrica manuscript — identification conditions and asymptotic distribution theory for an estimator, or axioms and existence/uniqueness for a theory model. Stress-tests the formal foundations before the proofs and simulations are written.
---

# Identification, Asymptotics, and Axiomatic Foundations (ecta-identification)

## When to trigger

- An estimator is defined and shown consistent, but its **limiting distribution** is missing
- Identification is asserted ("the parameter is identified") without a proof or counterexample analysis
- A theory model posits behavior but the **axioms** are not isolated, or existence/uniqueness is unproven
- Inference is proposed (standard errors, tests) without the asymptotic theory that justifies it

This is the formal spine. Econometrica referees check it first; a gap here sinks the paper.

**Re-slant for Econometrica.** Identification here is *not* primarily "do I have a credible
research design for a causal estimate" (that framing belongs to AER / QJE / JPE / REStud).
Econometrica's core is **identification and estimator validity inside structural and
econometric models** — is the structural parameter / functional a one-to-one image of the
data distribution, and does the proposed estimator have a derived limiting distribution that
licenses its inference? Credible-design content (Branch D) is still in scope for the
journal's applied/structural submissions, but the methodological object — completeness,
rank, support, the asymptotic law of *your* estimator — is what carries the paper. Lineage:
GMM identification and asymptotics (Hansen 1982), nested fixed-point identification of a
dynamic discrete-choice model (Rust 1987), selection-model identification (Heckman 1979).

## Branch A — Econometric theory: identification

1. **Define the parameter / object** as a functional of the data-generating process, separate
   from any estimator. Identification is a property of the population, not the sample.
2. **State the identification conditions** as numbered assumptions (rank / completeness /
   support / exclusion / monotonicity, as relevant). For each, say what fails without it.
3. **Prove identification**: show the map from distribution to parameter is one-to-one on the
   admissible class. Where identification can fail, give the explicit failure (partial
   identification, set identification, point identification under added conditions).
4. **Distinguish point vs. partial identification.** If only set identification holds, define
   the identified set and characterize it; do not silently assume point identification.

## Branch B — Econometric theory: asymptotic distribution theory

1. **Consistency** under stated conditions (which sample sizes / sequences; i.i.d., dependent,
   or panel asymptotics — be explicit about the regime).
2. **Rate of convergence** — root-n or nonstandard (n^{1/3}, boundary, super-consistent).
   A nonstandard rate must be derived, not assumed.
3. **Limiting distribution** — derive it; state the asymptotic variance and a consistent
   estimator of it. If the limit is non-normal (e.g., from a boundary, a non-differentiable
   moment, or a unit root), characterize it and justify inference accordingly.
4. **Uniformity** — is the asymptotics pointwise or uniform over the parameter space? Modern
   referees ask for uniform validity (weak-identification-robust, boundary-robust) where the
   pointwise theory is known to mislead.
5. **Regularity conditions** — smoothness, moment, and bandwidth/tuning conditions stated
   precisely; primitive where possible rather than high-level.

## Branch C — Micro / game / decision theory: axioms and existence/uniqueness

1. **Isolate the axioms** on the primitive (preference relation, choice function, payoff
   structure). Each axiom should be behaviorally interpretable and stated independently.
2. **Existence** — prove an equilibrium / representation / solution exists (fixed-point,
   topological, or constructive argument), with the topology and continuity conditions made explicit.
3. **Uniqueness** (or characterization of the set) — prove uniqueness or characterize
   multiplicity; a representation theorem should pin the functional form up to its known degrees
   of freedom (e.g., affine transformations of a utility index).
4. **Independence / tightness of axioms** — show no axiom is redundant (each is necessary) and,
   ideally, that the axiom set is tight (relaxing any one breaks the representation).
5. **Behavioral payoff** — translate the formal result into a statement about observable
   behavior or comparative statics.

## Branch D — Structural / empirical (and credible-design applied)

1. State the model's microfoundations and the **identifying restrictions** explicitly.
2. Argue identification of the structural parameters from the available variation (functional
   form, exclusion, support, instruments) — separate what is identified nonparametrically from
   what relies on parametric assumptions.
3. Provide the estimator's asymptotics or a justified inference procedure; if you use a known
   estimator off the shelf, cite the precise theorem that licenses your standard errors.
4. Counterfactuals must be objects the identification argument actually delivers.
5. **Credible-design content still belongs here** for applied/structural submissions (a DID,
   RDD, or IV used inside the paper). But at Econometrica the design alone is not the
   contribution — the methodological or identification argument is. If the design is
   off-the-shelf and the estimand is the whole point, the paper is general-interest-applied,
   not Econometrica (see `ecta-topic-selection`).

## Checklist

- [ ] Parameter/object defined as a population functional, separate from the estimator
- [ ] Identification conditions numbered; each shown to bind (counterexample if dropped)
- [ ] Point vs. partial identification stated honestly
- [ ] Rate of convergence derived (not assumed), including any nonstandard rate
- [ ] Limiting distribution derived; asymptotic variance + consistent estimator given
- [ ] Pointwise vs. uniform asymptotics addressed; weak-identification robustness considered
- [ ] Regularity conditions primitive and minimal
- [ ] (Theory) axioms isolated, independent, behaviorally interpretable; existence + uniqueness proven

## Anti-patterns

- "The parameter is clearly identified" with no argument and no failure analysis
- Reporting standard errors with no asymptotic theory justifying them
- Assuming root-n / normality when the moment condition is non-differentiable or on a boundary
- Pointwise asymptotics in a setting (weak IV, near-boundary) where they are known to fail
- High-level "regularity conditions" that quietly assume the hard part
- Axioms that overlap or include a redundant one; existence claimed without a fixed-point argument
- A representation theorem that does not pin the functional form (uniqueness left open)

## Output format

```
【Branch】identification / asymptotics / axioms / structural
【Object/parameter】... (population functional or representation)
【Identification】point / partial — argument: ...
【Rate & limit】rate: ...; limiting distribution: ...; variance estimator: ...
【Uniformity】pointwise / uniform / weak-id-robust
【Regularity conditions】[...]  (gaps: [...])
【Next step】ecta-theory-model
```

Attribution

brycewang-stanfordbrycewang-stanford
View sourceMore from brycewang-stanford →
SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Know which skills are safe — weekly.

Best new skills + every skill we flagged as malicious. From the team that scanned 103,619.

Join free

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Know which skills are safe — weekly.

Best new skills + every skill we flagged as malicious. From the team that scanned 103,619.

Join free

Related Skills

Caveman

Ultra-compressed communication mode that cuts output tokens while keeping technical accuracy. Levels: lite, full, ultra and the wenyan variants. Use for /caveman, "caveman mode", "talk like caveman", "be brief" or "less tokens".

1066601 votes

Hyperplan

Adversarial multi-agent planning skill. Self-orchestrates 5 hostile category members (unspecified-low, unspecified-high, deep, ultrabrain, artistry) via team-mode for ruthless cross-critique debate, distills only the defensible insights, then MANDATORILY hands the distilled insight bundle to the `plan` agent for executable plan formalization. Use when planning needs maximum rigor and surfacing of weak assumptions, blind spots, and over-engineering. Triggers: 'hyperplan', 'hpp', '/hyperplan', ...

693161 votes

Mcp Code Execution

Routes multi-tool workflows through MCP servers for large datasets and pipelines. Use when Bash tool overhead is limiting throughput on data-heavy tasks.

3351 votes

catchup

Recovers the conversation and failed tool calls of a previous Codex, Claude Code, Antigravity, Cline, Copilot CLI, Cursor, DeepSeek Harness, Kimi, OpenCode, Pi Agent, or ZCode session. Use when the user says "catch up", "what did the last session do", "get me up to speed", "I switched agents", asks to recover/summarize a previous session before continuing, or asks to diagnose or report a catchup failure. Do NOT use for the current conversation, git history, or any non-agent log.

691 votes

math-skill

A comprehensive mathematical reasoning skill for AI assistants — handles arithmetic to research-level problems with rigorous step-by-step reasoning, systematic verification, and transparent uncertainty handling

381 votes
View all in ai-agents →