Making causal inferences from observational studies can be challenging when confounders are missing not at random. In such cases, identifying causal effects is often not guaranteed. Motivated by a real example, we consider a treatment-independent missingness assumption under which we establish the identification of causal effects when confounders are missing not at random. We propose a weighted estimating equation (WEE) approach for estimating model parameters and introduce three estimators for the average causal effect, based on regression, propensity score weighting, and doubly robust estimation. We evaluate the performance of these estimators through simulations, and provide a real data analysis to illustrate our proposed method.
相關內容
Causal inference from observational data is crucial for many disciplines such as medicine and economics. However, sharp bounds for causal effects under relaxations of the unconfoundedness assumption (causal sensitivity analysis) are subject to ongoing research. So far, works with sharp bounds are restricted to fairly simple settings (e.g., a single binary treatment). In this paper, we propose a unified framework for causal sensitivity analysis under unobserved confounding in various settings. For this, we propose a flexible generalization of the marginal sensitivity model (MSM) and then derive sharp bounds for a large class of causal effects. This includes (conditional) average treatment effects, effects for mediation analysis and path analysis, and distributional effects. Furthermore, our sensitivity model is applicable to discrete, continuous, and time-varying treatments. It allows us to interpret the partial identification problem under unobserved confounding as a distribution shift in the latent confounders while evaluating the causal effect of interest. In the special case of a single binary treatment, our bounds for (conditional) average treatment effects coincide with recent optimality results for causal sensitivity analysis. Finally, we propose a scalable algorithm to estimate our sharp bounds from observational data.
In order to achieve unbiased and efficient estimators of causal effects from observational data, covariate selection for confounding adjustment becomes an important task in causal inference. Despite recent advancements in graphical criterion for constructing valid and efficient adjustment sets, these methods often rely on assumptions that may not hold in practice. We examine the properties of existing graph-free covariate selection methods with respect to both validity and efficiency, highlighting the potential dangers of producing invalid adjustment sets when hidden variables are present. To address this issue, we propose a novel graph-free method, referred to as CMIO, adapted from Mixed Integer Optimization (MIO) with a set of causal constraints. Our results demonstrate that CMIO outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods and provides theoretically sound outputs. Furthermore, we present a revised version of CMIO capable of handling the scenario in the absence of causal sufficiency and graphical information, offering efficient and valid covariate adjustments for causal inference.
Existing heterogeneous treatment effects learners, also known as conditional average treatment effects (CATE) learners, lack a general mechanism for end-to-end inter-treatment information sharing, and data have to be split among potential outcome functions to train CATE learners which can lead to biased estimates with limited observational datasets. To address this issue, we propose a novel deep learning-based framework to train CATE learners that facilitates dynamic end-to-end information sharing among treatment groups. The framework is based on \textit{soft weight sharing} of \textit{hypernetworks}, which offers advantages such as parameter efficiency, faster training, and improved results. The proposed framework complements existing CATE learners and introduces a new class of uncertainty-aware CATE learners that we refer to as \textit{HyperCATE}. We develop HyperCATE versions of commonly used CATE learners and evaluate them on IHDP, ACIC-2016, and Twins benchmarks. Our experimental results show that the proposed framework improves the CATE estimation error via counterfactual inference, with increasing effectiveness for smaller datasets.
Simulation-based inference (SBI) methods such as approximate Bayesian computation (ABC), synthetic likelihood, and neural posterior estimation (NPE) rely on simulating statistics to infer parameters of intractable likelihood models. However, such methods are known to yield untrustworthy and misleading inference outcomes under model misspecification, thus hindering their widespread applicability. In this work, we propose the first general approach to handle model misspecification that works across different classes of SBI methods. Leveraging the fact that the choice of statistics determines the degree of misspecification in SBI, we introduce a regularized loss function that penalises those statistics that increase the mismatch between the data and the model. Taking NPE and ABC as use cases, we demonstrate the superior performance of our method on high-dimensional time-series models that are artificially misspecified. We also apply our method to real data from the field of radio propagation where the model is known to be misspecified. We show empirically that the method yields robust inference in misspecified scenarios, whilst still being accurate when the model is well-specified.
Display Ads and the generalized assignment problem are two well-studied online packing problems with important applications in ad allocation and other areas. In both problems, ad impressions arrive online and have to be allocated immediately to budget-constrained advertisers. Worst-case algorithms that achieve the ideal competitive ratio are known, but might act overly conservative given the predictable and usually tame nature of real-world input. Given this discrepancy, we develop an algorithm for both problems that incorporate machine-learned predictions and can thus improve the performance beyond the worst-case. Our algorithm is based on the work of Feldman et al. (2009) and similar in nature to Mahdian et al. (2007) who were the first to develop a learning-augmented algorithm for the related, but more structured Ad Words problem. We use a novel analysis to show that our algorithm is able to capitalize on a good prediction, while being robust against poor predictions. We experimentally evaluate our algorithm on synthetic and real-world data on a wide range of predictions. Our algorithm is consistently outperforming the worst-case algorithm without predictions.
Inferring causal structures from time series data is the central interest of many scientific inquiries. A major barrier to such inference is the problem of subsampling, i.e., the frequency of measurement is much lower than that of causal influence. To overcome this problem, numerous methods have been proposed, yet either was limited to the linear case or failed to achieve identifiability. In this paper, we propose a constraint-based algorithm that can identify the entire causal structure from subsampled time series, without any parametric constraint. Our observation is that the challenge of subsampling arises mainly from hidden variables at the unobserved time steps. Meanwhile, every hidden variable has an observed proxy, which is essentially itself at some observable time in the future, benefiting from the temporal structure. Based on these, we can leverage the proxies to remove the bias induced by the hidden variables and hence achieve identifiability. Following this intuition, we propose a proxy-based causal discovery algorithm. Our algorithm is nonparametric and can achieve full causal identification. Theoretical advantages are reflected in synthetic and real-world experiments.
Discovering causal relations from observational data is important. The existence of unobserved variables, such as latent confounders or mediators, can mislead the causal identification. To address this issue, proximal causal discovery methods proposed to adjust for the bias with the proxy of the unobserved variable. However, these methods presumed the data is discrete, which limits their real-world application. In this paper, we propose a proximal causal discovery method that can well handle the continuous variables. Our observation is that discretizing continuous variables can can lead to serious errors and comprise the power of the proxy. Therefore, to use proxy variables in the continuous case, the critical point is to control the discretization error. To this end, we identify mild regularity conditions on the conditional distributions, enabling us to control the discretization error to an infinitesimal level, as long as the proxy is discretized with sufficiently fine, finite bins. Based on this, we design a proxy-based hypothesis test for identifying causal relationships when unobserved variables are present. Our test is consistent, meaning it has ideal power when large samples are available. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our method using synthetic and real-world data.
Recent critiques of Physics Education Research (PER) studies have revoiced the critical issues when drawing causal inferences from observational data where no intervention is present. In response to a call for a "causal reasoning primer", this paper discusses some of the fundamental issues underlying statistical causal inference. In reviewing these issues, we discuss well-established causal inference methods commonly applied in other fields and discuss their application to PER. Using simulated data sets, we illustrate (i) why analysis for causal inference should control for confounders but not control for mediators and colliders and (ii) that multiple proposed causal models can fit a highly correlated data set. Finally, we discuss how these causal inference methods can be used to represent and explain existing issues in quantitative PER. Throughout, we discuss a central issue: quantitative results from observational studies cannot support a researcher's proposed causal model over other alternative models. To address this issue, we propose an explicit role for observational studies in PER that draw statistical causal inferences: proposing future intervention studies and predicting their outcomes. Mirroring a broader connection between theoretical motivating experiments in physics, observational studies in PER can make quantitative predictions of the causal effects of interventions, and future intervention studies can test those predictions directly.
A fundamental goal of scientific research is to learn about causal relationships. However, despite its critical role in the life and social sciences, causality has not had the same importance in Natural Language Processing (NLP), which has traditionally placed more emphasis on predictive tasks. This distinction is beginning to fade, with an emerging area of interdisciplinary research at the convergence of causal inference and language processing. Still, research on causality in NLP remains scattered across domains without unified definitions, benchmark datasets and clear articulations of the remaining challenges. In this survey, we consolidate research across academic areas and situate it in the broader NLP landscape. We introduce the statistical challenge of estimating causal effects, encompassing settings where text is used as an outcome, treatment, or as a means to address confounding. In addition, we explore potential uses of causal inference to improve the performance, robustness, fairness, and interpretability of NLP models. We thus provide a unified overview of causal inference for the computational linguistics community.
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.
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191