We consider the estimation of average treatment effects in observational studies without the standard assumption of unconfoundedness. We propose a new framework of robust causal inference under the general observational study setting with the possible existence of unobserved confounders. Our approach is based on the method of distributionally robust optimization and proceeds in two steps. We first specify the maximal degree to which the distribution of unobserved potential outcomes may deviate from that of obsered outcomes. We then derive sharp bounds on the average treatment effects under this assumption. Our framework encompasses the popular marginal sensitivity model as a special case and can be extended to the difference-in-difference and regression discontinuity designs as well as instrumental variables. Through simulation and empirical studies, we demonstrate the applicability of the proposed methodology to real-world settings.
相關內容
Proper econometric analysis should be informed by data structure. Many forms of financial data are recorded in discrete-time and relate to products of a finite term. If the data comes from a financial trust, it will often be further subject to random left-truncation. While the literature for estimating a distribution function from left-truncated data is extensive, a thorough literature search reveals that the case of discrete data over a finite number of possible values has received little attention. A precise discrete framework and suitable sampling procedure for the Woodroofe-type estimator for discrete data over a finite number of possible values is therefore established. Subsequently, the resulting vector of hazard rate estimators is proved to be asymptotically normal with independent components. Asymptotic normality of the survival function estimator is then established. Sister results for the left-truncating random variable are also proved. Taken together, the resulting joint vector of hazard rate estimates for the lifetime and left-truncation random variables is proved to be the maximum likelihood estimate of the parameters of the conditional joint lifetime and left-truncation distribution given the lifetime has not been left-truncated. A hypothesis test for the shape of the distribution function based on our asymptotic results is derived. Such a test is useful to formally assess the plausibility of the stationarity assumption in length-biased sampling. The finite sample performance of the estimators is investigated in a simulation study. Applicability of the theoretical results in an econometric setting is demonstrated with a subset of data from the Mercedes-Benz 2017-A securitized bond.
We study the problem of reconstructing the Faber--Schauder coefficients of a continuous function $f$ from discrete observations of its antiderivative $F$. Our approach starts with formulating this problem through piecewise quadratic spline interpolation. We then provide a closed-form solution and an in-depth error analysis. These results lead to some surprising observations, which also throw new light on the classical topic of quadratic spline interpolation itself: They show that the well-known instabilities of this method can be located exclusively within the final generation of estimated Faber--Schauder coefficients, which suffer from non-locality and strong dependence on the initial value and the given data. By contrast, all other Faber--Schauder coefficients depend only locally on the data, are independent of the initial value, and admit uniform error bounds. We thus conclude that a robust and well-behaved estimator for our problem can be obtained by simply dropping the final-generation coefficients from the estimated Faber--Schauder coefficients.
Clinical studies sometimes encounter truncation by death, rendering outcomes undefined. Statistical analysis based solely on observed survivors may give biased results because the characteristics of survivors differ between treatment groups. By principal stratification, the survivor average causal effect was proposed as a causal estimand defined in always-survivors. However, this estimand is not identifiable when there is unmeasured confounding between the treatment assignment and survival or outcome process. In this paper, we consider the comparison between an aggressive treatment and a conservative treatment with monotonicity on survival. First, we show that the survivor average causal effect on the conservative treatment is identifiable based on a substitutional variable under appropriate assumptions, even when the treatment assignment is not ignorable. Next, we propose an augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW) type estimator for this estimand with double robustness. Finally, large sample properties of this estimator are established. The proposed method is applied to investigate the effect of allogeneic stem cell transplantation types on leukemia relapse.
This study demonstrates the existence of a testable condition for the identification of the causal effect of a treatment on an outcome in observational data, which relies on two sets of variables: observed covariates to be controlled for and a suspected instrument. Under a causal structure commonly found in empirical applications, the testable conditional independence of the suspected instrument and the outcome given the treatment and the covariates has two implications. First, the instrument is valid, i.e. it does not directly affect the outcome (other than through the treatment) and is unconfounded conditional on the covariates. Second, the treatment is unconfounded conditional on the covariates such that the treatment effect is identified. We suggest tests of this conditional independence based on machine learning methods that account for covariates in a data-driven way and investigate their asymptotic behavior and finite sample performance in a simulation study. We also apply our testing approach to evaluating the impact of fertility on female labor supply when using the sibling sex ratio of the first two children as supposed instrument, which by and large points to a violation of our testable implication for the moderate set of socio-economic covariates considered.
Machine learning algorithms with empirical risk minimization are vulnerable under distributional shifts due to the greedy adoption of all the correlations found in training data. There is an emerging literature on tackling this problem by minimizing the worst-case risk over an uncertainty set. However, existing methods mostly construct ambiguity sets by treating all variables equally regardless of the stability of their correlations with the target, resulting in the overwhelmingly-large uncertainty set and low confidence of the learner. In this paper, we propose a novel Stable Adversarial Learning (SAL) algorithm that leverages heterogeneous data sources to construct a more practical uncertainty set and conduct differentiated robustness optimization, where covariates are differentiated according to the stability of their correlations with the target. We theoretically show that our method is tractable for stochastic gradient-based optimization and provide the performance guarantees for our method. Empirical studies on both simulation and real datasets validate the effectiveness of our method in terms of uniformly good performance across unknown distributional shifts.
Decision tree learning is increasingly being used for pointwise inference. Important applications include causal heterogenous treatment effects and dynamic policy decisions, as well as conditional quantile regression and design of experiments, where tree estimation and inference is conducted at specific values of the covariates. In this paper, we call into question the use of decision trees (trained by adaptive recursive partitioning) for such purposes by demonstrating that they can fail to achieve polynomial rates of convergence in uniform norm, even with pruning. Instead, the convergence may be poly-logarithmic or, in some important special cases, such as honest regression trees, fail completely. We show that random forests can remedy the situation, turning poor performing trees into nearly optimal procedures, at the cost of losing interpretability and introducing two additional tuning parameters. The two hallmarks of random forests, subsampling and the random feature selection mechanism, are seen to each distinctively contribute to achieving nearly optimal performance for the model class considered.
How should we intervene on an unknown structural causal model to maximize a downstream variable of interest? This optimization of the output of a system of interconnected variables, also known as causal Bayesian optimization (CBO), has important applications in medicine, ecology, and manufacturing. Standard Bayesian optimization algorithms fail to effectively leverage the underlying causal structure. Existing CBO approaches assume noiseless measurements and do not come with guarantees. We propose model-based causal Bayesian optimization (MCBO), an algorithm that learns a full system model instead of only modeling intervention-reward pairs. MCBO propagates epistemic uncertainty about the causal mechanisms through the graph and trades off exploration and exploitation via the optimism principle. We bound its cumulative regret, and obtain the first non-asymptotic bounds for CBO. Unlike in standard Bayesian optimization, our acquisition function cannot be evaluated in closed form, so we show how the reparameterization trick can be used to apply gradient-based optimizers. Empirically we find that MCBO compares favorably with existing state-of-the-art approaches.
Analyzing observational data from multiple sources can be useful for increasing statistical power to detect a treatment effect; however, practical constraints such as privacy considerations may restrict individual-level information sharing across data sets. This paper develops federated methods that only utilize summary-level information from heterogeneous data sets. Our federated methods provide doubly-robust point estimates of treatment effects as well as variance estimates. We derive the asymptotic distributions of our federated estimators, which are shown to be asymptotically equivalent to the corresponding estimators from the combined, individual-level data. We show that to achieve these properties, federated methods should be adjusted based on conditions such as whether models are correctly specified and stable across heterogeneous data sets.
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.
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