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.
相關內容
The parameters of the log-logistic distribution are generally estimated based on classical methods such as maximum likelihood estimation, whereas these methods usually result in severe biased estimates when the data contain outliers. In this paper, we consider several alternative estimators, which not only have closed-form expressions, but also are quite robust to a certain level of data contamination. We investigate the robustness property of each estimator in terms of the breakdown point. The finite sample performance and effectiveness of these estimators are evaluated through Monte Carlo simulations and a real-data application. Numerical results demonstrate that the proposed estimators perform favorably in a manner that they are comparable with the maximum likelihood estimator for the data without contamination and that they provide superior performance in the presence of data contamination.
Variational Bayesian posterior inference often requires simplifying approximations such as mean-field parametrisation to ensure tractability. However, prior work has associated the variational mean-field approximation for Bayesian neural networks with underfitting in the case of small datasets or large model sizes. In this work, we show that invariances in the likelihood function of over-parametrised models contribute to this phenomenon because these invariances complicate the structure of the posterior by introducing discrete and/or continuous modes which cannot be well approximated by Gaussian mean-field distributions. In particular, we show that the mean-field approximation has an additional gap in the evidence lower bound compared to a purpose-built posterior that takes into account the known invariances. Importantly, this invariance gap is not constant; it vanishes as the approximation reverts to the prior. We proceed by first considering translation invariances in a linear model with a single data point in detail. We show that, while the true posterior can be constructed from a mean-field parametrisation, this is achieved only if the objective function takes into account the invariance gap. Then, we transfer our analysis of the linear model to neural networks. Our analysis provides a framework for future work to explore solutions to the invariance problem.
To estimate causal effects, analysts performing observational studies in health settings utilize several strategies to mitigate bias due to confounding by indication. There are two broad classes of approaches for these purposes: use of confounders and instrumental variables (IVs). Because such approaches are largely characterized by untestable assumptions, analysts must operate under an indefinite paradigm that these methods will work imperfectly. In this tutorial, we formalize a set of general principles and heuristics for estimating causal effects in the two approaches when the assumptions are potentially violated. This crucially requires reframing the process of observational studies as hypothesizing potential scenarios where the estimates from one approach are less inconsistent than the other. While most of our discussion of methodology centers around the linear setting, we touch upon complexities in non-linear settings and flexible procedures such as target minimum loss-based estimation (TMLE) and double machine learning (DML). To demonstrate the application of our principles, we investigate the use of donepezil off-label for mild cognitive impairment (MCI). We compare and contrast results from confounder and IV methods, traditional and flexible, within our analysis and to a similar observational study and clinical trial.
To efficiently analyse system reliability, graphical tools such as fault trees and Bayesian networks are widely adopted. In this article, instead of conventional graphical tools, we apply a probabilistic graphical model called the chain event graph (CEG) to represent failure and deteriorating processes of a system. The CEG is derived from an event tree and can flexibly represent the unfolding of the asymmetric processes. We customise a domain-specific intervention on the CEG called the remedial intervention for maintenance. This fixes the root causes of a failure and returns the status of the system to as good as new: a novel type of intervention designed specifically for reliability applications. The semantics of the CEG are expressive enough to capture the necessary intervention calculus. Furthermore through the bespoke causal algebras the CEG provides a transparent framework to guide and express the rationale behind predictive inferences about the effects of various types of the remedial intervention. A back-door theorem is adapted to apply to these interventions to help discover when causal effects can be identified from a partially observed system.
Existing machine learning methods for causal inference usually estimate quantities expressed via the mean of potential outcomes (e.g., average treatment effect). However, such quantities do not capture the full information about the distribution of potential outcomes. In this work, we estimate the density of potential outcomes after interventions from observational data. Specifically, we propose a novel, fully-parametric deep learning method for this purpose, called Interventional Normalizing Flows. Our Interventional Normalizing Flows offer a properly normalized density estimator. For this, we introduce an iterative training of two normalizing flows, namely (i) a teacher flow for estimation of nuisance parameters and (ii) a student flow for parametric estimation of the density of potential outcomes. For efficient and doubly-robust estimation of the student flow parameters, we develop a custom tractable optimization objective based on a one-step bias correction. Across various experiments, we demonstrate that our Interventional Normalizing Flows are expressive and highly effective, and scale well with both sample size and high-dimensional confounding. To the best of our knowledge, our Interventional Normalizing Flows are the first fully-parametric, deep learning method for density estimation of potential outcomes.
In real-world phenomena which involve mutual influence or causal effects between interconnected units, equilibrium states are typically represented with cycles in graphical models. An expressive class of graphical models, \textit{relational causal models}, can represent and reason about complex dynamic systems exhibiting such cycles or feedback loops. Existing cyclic causal discovery algorithms for learning causal models from observational data assume that the data instances are independent and identically distributed which makes them unsuitable for relational causal models. At the same time, causal discovery algorithms for relational causal models assume acyclicity. In this work, we examine the necessary and sufficient conditions under which a constraint-based relational causal discovery algorithm is sound and complete for \textit{cyclic relational causal models}. We introduce \textit{relational acyclification}, an operation specifically designed for relational models that enables reasoning about the identifiability of cyclic relational causal models. We show that under the assumptions of relational acyclification and $\sigma$-faithfulness, the relational causal discovery algorithm RCD (Maier et al. 2013) is sound and complete for cyclic models. We present experimental results to support our claim.
Speaker verification (SV) provides billions of voice-enabled devices with access control, and ensures the security of voice-driven technologies. As a type of biometrics, it is necessary that SV is unbiased, with consistent and reliable performance across speakers irrespective of their demographic, social and economic attributes. Current SV evaluation practices are insufficient for evaluating bias: they are over-simplified and aggregate users, not representative of real-life usage scenarios, and consequences of errors are not accounted for. This paper proposes design guidelines for constructing SV evaluation datasets that address these short-comings. We propose a schema for grading the difficulty of utterance pairs, and present an algorithm for generating inclusive SV datasets. We empirically validate our proposed method in a set of experiments on the VoxCeleb1 dataset. Our results confirm that the count of utterance pairs/speaker, and the difficulty grading of utterance pairs have a significant effect on evaluation performance and variability. Our work contributes to the development of SV evaluation practices that are inclusive and fair.
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.
小貼士
登錄享
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191