Careful reader Ian Gow from Stanford caught the following two typos/mistakes:
Assumption CA1 on p. 177 should read just like assumption A1 on p. 155, except conditional on X_i (the subscript 0 on Y_0i is incorrect).
On p. 183, the para beginning “The size of the group of compliers i given by . . .” First, the statement that P(S_1i=>s=>S_0i) is non-negative by virtue of monotonicity is silly: of course this non-negative, since its a probability! Monotonicity is needed, however, for this to be equal to the difference in the CDFs of S0_i and S1_i (as the sentence following should read).
Typos and mistakes on pages 177 and 183
Careful reader Ian Gow from Stanford caught the following two typos/mistakes:
Assumption CA1 on p. 177 should read just like assumption A1 on p. 155, except conditional on X_i (the subscript 0 on Y_0i is incorrect).
On p. 183, the para beginning “The size of the group of compliers i given by . . .” First, the statement that P(S_1i=>s=>S_0i) is non-negative by virtue of monotonicity is silly: of course this non-negative, since its a probability! Monotonicity is needed, however, for this to be equal to the difference in the CDFs of S0_i and S1_i (as the sentence following should read).
Thanks Ian!