This paper presents a topological learning-theoretic perspective on causal inference by introducing a series of topologies defined on general spaces of structural causal models (SCMs). As an illustration of the framework we prove a topological causal hierarchy theorem, showing that substantive assumption-free causal inference is possible only in a meager set of SCMs. Thanks to a known correspondence between open sets in the weak topology and statistically verifiable hypotheses, our results show that inductive assumptions sufficient to license valid causal inferences are statistically unverifiable in principle. Similar to no-free-lunch theorems for statistical inference, the present results clarify the inevitability of substantial assumptions for causal inference. An additional benefit of our topological approach is that it easily accommodates SCMs with infinitely many variables. We finally suggest that the framework may be helpful for the positive project of exploring and assessing alternative causal-inductive assumptions.
相關內容
The notion of exchangeability has been recognized in the causal inference literature in various guises, but only rarely in the original meaning as a symmetry property of probability distributions. Since the latter is a standard ingredient in Bayesian inference, we argue that in Bayesian causal inference it is natural to link the causal model, including the notion of confounding and definition of causal contrasts of interest, to the concept of exchangeability. Here we propose a probabilistic between-group exchangeability property as an identifying condition for causal effects, relate it to alternative conditions for unconfounded inferences, commonly stated using potential outcomes, and define causal contrasts in the presence of exchangeability in terms of posterior predictive expectations for further exchangeable units. While our main focus is in a point treatment setting, we also investigate how this reasoning carries over to longitudinal settings.
Inference about a scalar parameter of interest typically relies on the asymptotic normality of common likelihood pivots, such as the signed likelihood root, the score and Wald statistics. Nevertheless, the resulting inferential procedures are known to perform poorly when the dimension of the nuisance parameter is large relative to the sample size and when the information about the parameters is limited. In many such cases, the use of asymptotic normality of analytical modifications of the signed likelihood root is known to recover inferential performance. It is proved here that parametric bootstrap of standard likelihood pivots results in as accurate inferences as analytical modifications of the signed likelihood root do in stratified models with stratum specific nuisance parameters. We focus on the challenging case where the number of strata increases as fast or faster than the stratum samples size. It is also shown that this equivalence holds regardless of whether constrained or unconstrained bootstrap is used. This is in contrast to when the number of strata is fixed or increases slower than the stratum sample size, where we show that constrained bootstrap corrects inference to a higher order than unconstrained bootstrap. Simulation experiments support the theoretical findings and demonstrate the excellent performance of bootstrap in extreme scenarios.
The idea of slicing divergences has been proven to be successful when comparing two probability measures in various machine learning applications including generative modeling, and consists in computing the expected value of a `base divergence' between one-dimensional random projections of the two measures. However, the topological, statistical, and computational consequences of this technique have not yet been well-established. In this paper, we aim at bridging this gap and derive various theoretical properties of sliced probability divergences. First, we show that slicing preserves the metric axioms and the weak continuity of the divergence, implying that the sliced divergence will share similar topological properties. We then precise the results in the case where the base divergence belongs to the class of integral probability metrics. On the other hand, we establish that, under mild conditions, the sample complexity of a sliced divergence does not depend on the problem dimension. We finally apply our general results to several base divergences, and illustrate our theory on both synthetic and real data experiments.
Learning a graph topology to reveal the underlying relationship between data entities plays an important role in various machine learning and data analysis tasks. Under the assumption that structured data vary smoothly over a graph, the problem can be formulated as a regularised convex optimisation over a positive semidefinite cone and solved by iterative algorithms. Classic methods require an explicit convex function to reflect generic topological priors, e.g. the $\ell_1$ penalty for enforcing sparsity, which limits the flexibility and expressiveness in learning rich topological structures. We propose to learn a mapping from node data to the graph structure based on the idea of learning to optimise (L2O). Specifically, our model first unrolls an iterative primal-dual splitting algorithm into a neural network. The key structural proximal projection is replaced with a variational autoencoder that refines the estimated graph with enhanced topological properties. The model is trained in an end-to-end fashion with pairs of node data and graph samples. Experiments on both synthetic and real-world data demonstrate that our model is more efficient than classic iterative algorithms in learning a graph with specific topological properties.
Causality can be described in terms of a structural causal model (SCM) that carries information on the variables of interest and their mechanistic relations. For most processes of interest the underlying SCM will only be partially observable, thus causal inference tries to leverage any exposed information. Graph neural networks (GNN) as universal approximators on structured input pose a viable candidate for causal learning, suggesting a tighter integration with SCM. To this effect we present a theoretical analysis from first principles that establishes a novel connection between GNN and SCM while providing an extended view on general neural-causal models. We then establish a new model class for GNN-based causal inference that is necessary and sufficient for causal effect identification. Our empirical illustration on simulations and standard benchmarks validate our theoretical proofs.
Learning disentanglement aims at finding a low dimensional representation which consists of multiple explanatory and generative factors of the observational data. The framework of variational autoencoder (VAE) is commonly used to disentangle independent factors from observations. However, in real scenarios, factors with semantics are not necessarily independent. Instead, there might be an underlying causal structure which renders these factors dependent. We thus propose a new VAE based framework named CausalVAE, which includes a Causal Layer to transform independent exogenous factors into causal endogenous ones that correspond to causally related concepts in data. We further analyze the model identifiabitily, showing that the proposed model learned from observations recovers the true one up to a certain degree. Experiments are conducted on various datasets, including synthetic and real word benchmark CelebA. Results show that the causal representations learned by CausalVAE are semantically interpretable, and their causal relationship as a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) is identified with good accuracy. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the proposed CausalVAE model is able to generate counterfactual data through "do-operation" to the causal factors.
Training datasets for machine learning often have some form of missingness. For example, to learn a model for deciding whom to give a loan, the available training data includes individuals who were given a loan in the past, but not those who were not. This missingness, if ignored, nullifies any fairness guarantee of the training procedure when the model is deployed. Using causal graphs, we characterize the missingness mechanisms in different real-world scenarios. We show conditions under which various distributions, used in popular fairness algorithms, can or can not be recovered from the training data. Our theoretical results imply that many of these algorithms can not guarantee fairness in practice. Modeling missingness also helps to identify correct design principles for fair algorithms. For example, in multi-stage settings where decisions are made in multiple screening rounds, we use our framework to derive the minimal distributions required to design a fair algorithm. Our proposed algorithm decentralizes the decision-making process and still achieves similar performance to the optimal algorithm that requires centralization and non-recoverable distributions.
This paper focuses on the expected difference in borrower's repayment when there is a change in the lender's credit decisions. Classical estimators overlook the confounding effects and hence the estimation error can be magnificent. As such, we propose another approach to construct the estimators such that the error can be greatly reduced. The proposed estimators are shown to be unbiased, consistent, and robust through a combination of theoretical analysis and numerical testing. Moreover, we compare the power of estimating the causal quantities between the classical estimators and the proposed estimators. The comparison is tested across a wide range of models, including linear regression models, tree-based models, and neural network-based models, under different simulated datasets that exhibit different levels of causality, different degrees of nonlinearity, and different distributional properties. Most importantly, we apply our approaches to a large observational dataset provided by a global technology firm that operates in both the e-commerce and the lending business. We find that the relative reduction of estimation error is strikingly substantial if the causal effects are accounted for correctly.
The aim of this paper is to offer the first systematic exploration and definition of equivalent causal models in the context where both models are not made up of the same variables. The idea is that two models are equivalent when they agree on all "essential" causal information that can be expressed using their common variables. I do so by focussing on the two main features of causal models, namely their structural relations and their functional relations. In particular, I define several relations of causal ancestry and several relations of causal sufficiency, and require that the most general of these relations are preserved across equivalent models.
Causal inference is a critical research topic across many domains, such as statistics, computer science, education, public policy and economics, for decades. Nowadays, estimating causal effect from observational data has become an appealing research direction owing to the large amount of available data and low budget requirement, compared with randomized controlled trials. Embraced with the rapidly developed machine learning area, various causal effect estimation methods for observational data have sprung up. In this survey, we provide a comprehensive review of causal inference methods under the potential outcome framework, one of the well known causal inference framework. The methods are divided into two categories depending on whether they require all three assumptions of the potential outcome framework or not. For each category, both the traditional statistical methods and the recent machine learning enhanced methods are discussed and compared. The plausible applications of these methods are also presented, including the applications in advertising, recommendation, medicine and so on. Moreover, the commonly used benchmark datasets as well as the open-source codes are also summarized, which facilitate researchers and practitioners to explore, evaluate and apply the causal inference methods.
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191