Recently, addressing spatial confounding has become a major topic in spatial statistics. However, the literature has provided conflicting definitions, and many proposed definitions do not address the issue of confounding as it is understood in causal inference. We define spatial confounding as the existence of an unmeasured causal confounder with a spatial structure. We present a causal inference framework for nonparametric identification of the causal effect of a continuous exposure on an outcome in the presence of spatial confounding. We propose double machine learning (DML), a procedure in which flexible models are used to regress both the exposure and outcome variables on confounders to arrive at a causal estimator with favorable robustness properties and convergence rates, and we prove that this approach is consistent and asymptotically normal under spatial dependence. As far as we are aware, this is the first approach to spatial confounding that does not rely on restrictive parametric assumptions (such as linearity, effect homogeneity, or Gaussianity) for both identification and estimation. We demonstrate the advantages of the DML approach analytically and in simulations. We apply our methods and reasoning to a study of the effect of fine particulate matter exposure during pregnancy on birthweight in California.
相關內容
Observational studies are the primary source of data for causal inference, but it is challenging when existing unmeasured confounding. Missing data problems are also common in observational studies. How to obtain the causal effects from the nonignorable missing data with unmeasured confounding is a challenge. In this paper, we consider that how to obtain complier average causal effect with unmeasured confounding from the nonignorable missing outcomes. We propose an auxiliary variable which plays two roles simultaneously, the one is the shadow variable for identification and the other is the instrumental variable for inference. We also illustrate some difference between some missing outcomes mechanisms in the previous work and the shadow variable assumption. We give a causal diagram to illustrate this description. Under such a setting, we present a general condition for nonparametric identification of the full data law from the nonignorable missing outcomes with this auxiliary variable. For inference, firstly, we recover the mean value of the outcome based on the generalized method of moments. Secondly, we propose an estimator to adjust for the unmeasured confounding to obtain complier average causal effect. We also establish the asymptotic results of the estimated parameters. We evaluate its performance via simulations and apply it to a real-life dataset about a political analysis.
Recent work has focused on the potential and pitfalls of causal identification in observational studies with multiple simultaneous treatments. Building on previous work, we show that even if the conditional distribution of unmeasured confounders given treatments were known exactly, the causal effects would not in general be identifiable, although they may be partially identified. Given these results, we propose a sensitivity analysis method for characterizing the effects of potential unmeasured confounding, tailored to the multiple treatment setting, that can be used to characterize a range of causal effects that are compatible with the observed data. Our method is based on a copula factorization of the joint distribution of outcomes, treatments, and confounders, and can be layered on top of arbitrary observed data models. We propose a practical implementation of this approach making use of the Gaussian copula, and establish conditions under which causal effects can be bounded. We also describe approaches for reasoning about effects, including calibrating sensitivity parameters, quantifying robustness of effect estimates, and selecting models that are most consistent with prior hypotheses.
Recurrent events, including cardiovascular events, are commonly observed in biomedical studies. Researchers must understand the effects of various treatments on recurrent events and investigate the underlying mediation mechanisms by which treatments may reduce the frequency of recurrent events are crucial. Although causal inference methods for recurrent event data have been proposed, they cannot be used to assess mediation. This study proposed a novel methodology of causal mediation analysis that accommodates recurrent outcomes of interest in a given individual. A formal definition of causal estimands (direct and indirect effects) within a counterfactual framework is given, empirical expressions for these effects are identified. To estimate these effects, a semiparametric estimator with triple robustness against model misspecification was developed. The proposed methodology was demonstrated in a real-world application. The method was applied to measure the effects of two diabetes drugs on the recurrence of cardiovascular disease and to examine the mediating role of kidney function in this process.
There are limited options to estimate the treatment effects of variables which are continuous and measured at multiple time points, particularly if the true dose-response curve should be estimated as closely as possible. However, these situations may be of relevance: in pharmacology, one may be interested in how outcomes of people living with -- and treated for -- HIV, such as viral failure, would vary for time-varying interventions such as different drug concentration trajectories. A challenge for doing causal inference with continuous interventions is that the positivity assumption is typically violated. To address positivity violations, we develop projection functions, which reweigh and redefine the estimand of interest based on functions of the conditional support for the respective interventions. With these functions, we obtain the desired dose-response curve in areas of enough support, and otherwise a meaningful estimand that does not require the positivity assumption. We develop $g$-computation type plug-in estimators for this case. Those are contrasted with g-computation estimators which are applied to continuous interventions without specifically addressing positivity violations, which we propose to be presented with diagnostics. The ideas are illustrated with longitudinal data from HIV positive children treated with an efavirenz-based regimen as part of the CHAPAS-3 trial, which enrolled children $<13$ years in Zambia/Uganda. Simulations show in which situations a standard $g$-computation approach is appropriate, and in which it leads to bias and how the proposed weighted estimation approach then recovers the alternative estimand of interest.
Causal discovery and causal reasoning are classically treated as separate and consecutive tasks: one first infers the causal graph, and then uses it to estimate causal effects of interventions. However, such a two-stage approach is uneconomical, especially in terms of actively collected interventional data, since the causal query of interest may not require a fully-specified causal model. From a Bayesian perspective, it is also unnatural, since a causal query (e.g., the causal graph or some causal effect) can be viewed as a latent quantity subject to posterior inference -- other unobserved quantities that are not of direct interest (e.g., the full causal model) ought to be marginalized out in this process and contribute to our epistemic uncertainty. In this work, we propose Active Bayesian Causal Inference (ABCI), a fully-Bayesian active learning framework for integrated causal discovery and reasoning, which jointly infers a posterior over causal models and queries of interest. In our approach to ABCI, we focus on the class of causally-sufficient, nonlinear additive noise models, which we model using Gaussian processes. We sequentially design experiments that are maximally informative about our target causal query, collect the corresponding interventional data, and update our beliefs to choose the next experiment. Through simulations, we demonstrate that our approach is more data-efficient than several baselines that only focus on learning the full causal graph. This allows us to accurately learn downstream causal queries from fewer samples while providing well-calibrated uncertainty estimates for the quantities of interest.
The concept of causality plays an important role in human cognition . In the past few decades, causal inference has been well developed in many fields, such as computer science, medicine, economics, and education. With the advancement of deep learning techniques, it has been increasingly used in causal inference against counterfactual data. Typically, deep causal models map the characteristics of covariates to a representation space and then design various objective optimization functions to estimate counterfactual data unbiasedly based on the different optimization methods. This paper focuses on the survey of the deep causal models, and its core contributions are as follows: 1) we provide relevant metrics under multiple treatments and continuous-dose treatment; 2) we incorporate a comprehensive overview of deep causal models from both temporal development and method classification perspectives; 3) we assist a detailed and comprehensive classification and analysis of relevant datasets and source code.
Commonsense causality reasoning (CCR) aims at identifying plausible causes and effects in natural language descriptions that are deemed reasonable by an average person. Although being of great academic and practical interest, this problem is still shadowed by the lack of a well-posed theoretical framework; existing work usually relies on deep language models wholeheartedly, and is potentially susceptible to confounding co-occurrences. Motivated by classical causal principles, we articulate the central question of CCR and draw parallels between human subjects in observational studies and natural languages to adopt CCR to the potential-outcomes framework, which is the first such attempt for commonsense tasks. We propose a novel framework, ROCK, to Reason O(A)bout Commonsense K(C)ausality, which utilizes temporal signals as incidental supervision, and balances confounding effects using temporal propensities that are analogous to propensity scores. The ROCK implementation is modular and zero-shot, and demonstrates good CCR capabilities on various datasets.
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.
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.
Many current applications use recommendations in order to modify the natural user behavior, such as to increase the number of sales or the time spent on a website. This results in a gap between the final recommendation objective and the classical setup where recommendation candidates are evaluated by their coherence with past user behavior, by predicting either the missing entries in the user-item matrix, or the most likely next event. To bridge this gap, we optimize a recommendation policy for the task of increasing the desired outcome versus the organic user behavior. We show this is equivalent to learning to predict recommendation outcomes under a fully random recommendation policy. To this end, we propose a new domain adaptation algorithm that learns from logged data containing outcomes from a biased recommendation policy and predicts recommendation outcomes according to random exposure. We compare our method against state-of-the-art factorization methods, in addition to new approaches of causal recommendation and show significant improvements.
小貼士
登錄享
相關主題
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191