The performance of most causal effect estimators relies on accurate predictions of high-dimensional non-linear functions of the observed data. The remarkable flexibility of modern Machine Learning (ML) methods is perfectly suited to this task. However, data-driven hyperparameter tuning of ML methods requires effective model evaluation to avoid large errors in causal estimates, a task made more challenging because causal inference involves unavailable counterfactuals. Multiple performance-validation metrics have recently been proposed such that practitioners now not only have to make complex decisions about which causal estimators, ML learners and hyperparameters to choose, but also about which evaluation metric to use. This paper, motivated by unclear recommendations, investigates the interplay between the four different aspects of model evaluation for causal effect estimation. We develop a comprehensive experimental setup that involves many commonly used causal estimators, ML methods and evaluation approaches and apply it to four well-known causal inference benchmark datasets. Our results suggest that optimal hyperparameter tuning of ML learners is enough to reach state-of-the-art performance in effect estimation, regardless of estimators and learners. We conclude that most causal estimators are roughly equivalent in performance if tuned thoroughly enough. We also find hyperparameter tuning and model evaluation are much more important than causal estimators and ML methods. Finally, from the significant gap we find in estimation performance of popular evaluation metrics compared with optimal model selection choices, we call for more research into causal model evaluation to unlock the optimum performance not currently being delivered even by state-of-the-art procedures.
相關內容
Inference tasks in signal processing are often characterized by the availability of reliable statistical modeling with some missing instance-specific parameters. One conventional approach uses data to estimate these missing parameters and then infers based on the estimated model. Alternatively, data can also be leveraged to directly learn the inference mapping end-to-end. These approaches for combining partially-known statistical models and data in inference are related to the notions of generative and discriminative models used in the machine learning literature, typically considered in the context of classifiers. The goal of this lecture note is to introduce the concepts of generative and discriminative learning for inference with a partially-known statistical model. While machine learning systems often lack the interpretability of traditional signal processing methods, we focus on a simple setting where one can interpret and compare the approaches in a tractable manner that is accessible and relevant to signal processing readers. In particular, we exemplify the approaches for the task of Bayesian signal estimation in a jointly Gaussian setting with the mean-squared error (MSE) objective, i.e., a linear estimation setting.
In many forecasting settings, there is a specific interest in predicting the sign of an outcome variable correctly in addition to its magnitude. For instance, when forecasting armed conflicts, positive and negative log-changes in monthly fatalities represent escalation and de-escalation, respectively, and have very different implications. In the ViEWS forecasting challenge, a prediction competition on state-based violence, a novel evaluation score called targeted absolute deviation with direction augmentation (TADDA) has therefore been suggested, which accounts for both for the sign and magnitude of log-changes. While it has a straightforward intuitive motivation, the empirical results of the challenge show that a no-change model always predicting a log-change of zero outperforms all submitted forecasting models under the TADDA score. We provide a statistical explanation for this phenomenon. Analyzing the properties of TADDA, we find that in order to achieve good scores, forecasters often have an incentive to predict no or only modest log-changes. In particular, there is often an incentive to report conservative point predictions considerably closer to zero than the forecaster's actual predictive median or mean. In an empirical application, we demonstrate that a no-change model can be improved upon by tailoring predictions to the particularities of the TADDA score. We conclude by outlining some alternative scoring concepts.
Dataflow computing was shown to bring significant benefits to multiple niches of systems engineering and has the potential to become a general-purpose paradigm of choice for data-driven application development. One of the characteristic features of dataflow computing is the natural access to the dataflow graph of the entire system. Recently it has been observed that these dataflow graphs can be treated as complete graphical causal models, opening opportunities to apply causal inference techniques to dataflow systems. In this demonstration paper we aim to provide the first practical validation of this idea with a particular focus on causal fault localisation. We provide multiple demonstrations of how causal inference can be used to detect software bugs and data shifts in multiple scenarios with three modern dataflow engines.
An essential problem in causal inference is estimating causal effects from observational data. The problem becomes more challenging with the presence of unobserved confounders. When there are unobserved confounders, the commonly used back-door adjustment is not applicable. Although the instrumental variable (IV) methods can deal with unobserved confounders, they all assume that the treatment directly affects the outcome, and there is no mediator between the treatment and the outcome. This paper aims to use the front-door criterion to address the challenging problem with the presence of unobserved confounders and mediators. In practice, it is often difficult to identify the set of variables used for front-door adjustment from data. By leveraging the ability of deep generative models in representation learning, we propose FDVAE to learn the representation of a Front-Door adjustment set with a Variational AutoEncoder, instead of trying to search for a set of variables for front-door adjustment. Extensive experiments on synthetic datasets validate the effectiveness of FDVAE and its superiority over existing methods. The experiments also show that the performance of FDVAE is not sensitive to the causal strength of unobserved confounders and is feasible in the case of dimensionality mismatch between learned representations and the ground truth. We further apply the method to three real-world datasets to demonstrate its potential applications.
Many social events and policy interventions generate treatment effects that persistently spill over into neighboring areas, causing interference in both time and space. In this paper, we propose a design-based framework to identify and estimate these spillover effects in panel data, when temporal and spatial interference intertwine with each other in complex ways that are unknown to researchers. Our framework defines estimands that enable researchers to measure the influence of each type of interference, and we propose estimators that are consistent and asymptotically normal under the assumption of sequential ignorability and mild regularity conditions. We show that conventional methods in panel data analysis, such as the difference-in-differences (DID) estimator or fixed effects models, can lead to significant biases in such scenarios. We test the method's performance on both simulated datasets and the replication of an empirical study from political science.
Neural point estimators are neural networks that map data to parameter point estimates. They are fast, likelihood free and, due to their amortised nature, amenable to fast bootstrap-based uncertainty quantification. In this paper, we aim to increase the awareness of statisticians to this relatively new inferential tool, and to facilitate its adoption by providing user-friendly open-source software. We also give attention to the ubiquitous problem of making inference from replicated data, which we address in the neural setting using permutation-invariant neural networks. Through extensive simulation studies we show that these neural point estimators can quickly and optimally (in a Bayes sense) estimate parameters in weakly-identified and highly-parameterised models with relative ease. We demonstrate their applicability through an analysis of extreme sea-surface temperature in the Red Sea where, after training, we obtain parameter estimates and bootstrap-based confidence intervals from hundreds of spatial fields in a fraction of a second.
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.
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