Assessing causal effects in the presence of unmeasured confounding is a challenging problem. Although auxiliary variables, such as instrumental variables, are commonly used to identify causal effects, they are often unavailable in practice due to stringent and untestable conditions. To address this issue, previous researches have utilized linear structural equation models to show that the causal effect can be identifiable when noise variables of the treatment and outcome are both non-Gaussian. In this paper, we investigate the problem of identifying the causal effect using auxiliary covariates and non-Gaussianity from the treatment. Our key idea is to characterize the impact of unmeasured confounders using an observed covariate, assuming they are all Gaussian. The auxiliary covariate can be an invalid instrument or an invalid proxy variable. We demonstrate that the causal effect can be identified using this measured covariate, even when the only source of non-Gaussianity comes from the treatment. We then extend the identification results to the multi-treatment setting and provide sufficient conditions for identification. Based on our identification results, we propose a simple and efficient procedure for calculating causal effects and show the $\sqrt{n}$-consistency of the proposed estimator. Finally, we evaluate the performance of our estimator through simulation studies and an application.
相關內容
We study the problem of model selection in causal inference, specifically for the case of conditional average treatment effect (CATE) estimation under binary treatments. Unlike model selection in machine learning, there is no perfect analogue of cross-validation as we do not observe the counterfactual potential outcome for any data point. Towards this, there have been a variety of proxy metrics proposed in the literature, that depend on auxiliary nuisance models estimated from the observed data (propensity score model, outcome regression model). However, the effectiveness of these metrics has only been studied on synthetic datasets as we can access the counterfactual data for them. We conduct an extensive empirical analysis to judge the performance of these metrics introduced in the literature, and novel ones introduced in this work, where we utilize the latest advances in generative modeling to incorporate multiple realistic datasets. Our analysis suggests novel model selection strategies based on careful hyperparameter tuning of CATE estimators and causal ensembling.
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.
Conducting valid statistical analyses is challenging in the presence of missing-not-at-random (MNAR) data, where the missingness mechanism is dependent on the missing values themselves even conditioned on the observed data. Here, we consider a MNAR model that generalizes several prior popular MNAR models in two ways: first, it is less restrictive in terms of statistical independence assumptions imposed on the underlying joint data distribution, and second, it allows for all variables in the observed sample to have missing values. This MNAR model corresponds to a so-called criss-cross structure considered in the literature on graphical models of missing data that prevents nonparametric identification of the entire missing data model. Nonetheless, part of the complete-data distribution remains nonparametrically identifiable. By exploiting this fact and considering a rich class of exponential family distributions, we establish sufficient conditions for identification of the complete-data distribution as well as the entire missingness mechanism. We then propose methods for testing the independence restrictions encoded in such models using odds ratio as our parameter of interest. We adopt two semiparametric approaches for estimating the odds ratio parameter and establish the corresponding asymptotic theories: one involves maximizing a conditional likelihood with order statistics and the other uses estimating equations. The utility of our methods is illustrated via simulation studies.
In this paper, we study the estimation of the derivative of a regression function in a standard univariate regression model. The estimators are defined either by derivating nonparametric least-squares estimators of the regression function or by estimating the projection of the derivative. We prove two simple risk bounds allowing to compare our estimators. More elaborate bounds under a stability assumption are then provided. Bases and spaces on which we can illustrate our assumptions and first results are both of compact or non compact type, and we discuss the rates reached by our estimators. They turn out to be optimal in the compact case. Lastly, we propose a model selection procedure and prove the associated risk bound. To consider bases with a non compact support makes the problem difficult.
We consider the problem of estimating the causal effect of a treatment on an outcome in linear structural causal models (SCM) with latent confounders when we have access to a single proxy variable. Several methods (such as difference-in-difference (DiD) estimator or negative outcome control) have been proposed in this setting in the literature. However, these approaches require either restrictive assumptions on the data generating model or having access to at least two proxy variables. We propose a method to estimate the causal effect using cross moments between the treatment, the outcome, and the proxy variable. In particular, we show that the causal effect can be identified with simple arithmetic operations on the cross moments if the latent confounder in linear SCM is non-Gaussian. In this setting, DiD estimator provides an unbiased estimate only in the special case where the latent confounder has exactly the same direct causal effects on the outcomes in the pre-treatment and post-treatment phases. This translates to the common trend assumption in DiD, which we effectively relax. Additionally, we provide an impossibility result that shows the causal effect cannot be identified if the observational distribution over the treatment, the outcome, and the proxy is jointly Gaussian. Our experiments on both synthetic and real-world datasets showcase the effectiveness of the proposed approach in estimating the causal effect.
We study causal effect estimation from a mixture of observational and interventional data in a confounded linear regression model with multivariate treatments. We show that the statistical efficiency in terms of expected squared error can be improved by combining estimators arising from both the observational and interventional setting. To this end, we derive methods based on matrix weighted linear estimators and prove that our methods are asymptotically unbiased in the infinite sample limit. This is an important improvement compared to the pooled estimator using the union of interventional and observational data, for which the bias only vanishes if the ratio of observational to interventional data tends to zero. Studies on synthetic data confirm our theoretical findings. In settings where confounding is substantial and the ratio of observational to interventional data is large, our estimators outperform a Stein-type estimator and various other baselines.
Ridges play a vital role in accurately approximating the underlying structure of manifolds. In this paper, we explore the ridge's variation by applying a concave nonlinear transformation to the density function. Through the derivation of the Hessian matrix, we observe that nonlinear transformations yield a rank-one modification of the Hessian matrix. Leveraging the variational properties of eigenvalue problems, we establish a partial order inclusion relationship among the corresponding ridges. We intuitively discover that the transformation can lead to improved estimation of the tangent space via rank-one modification of the Hessian matrix. To validate our theories, we conduct extensive numerical experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets that demonstrate the superiority of the ridges obtained from our transformed approach in approximating the underlying truth manifold compared to other manifold fitting algorithms.
Causal inference with spatial environmental data is often challenging due to the presence of interference: outcomes for observational units depend on some combination of local and non-local treatment. This is especially relevant when estimating the effect of power plant emissions controls on population health, as pollution exposure is dictated by (i) the location of point-source emissions, as well as (ii) the transport of pollutants across space via dynamic physical-chemical processes. In this work, we estimate the effectiveness of air quality interventions at coal-fired power plants in reducing two adverse health outcomes in Texas in 2016: pediatric asthma ED visits and Medicare all-cause mortality. We develop methods for causal inference with interference when the underlying network structure is not known with certainty and instead must be estimated from ancillary data. We offer a Bayesian, spatial mechanistic model for the interference mapping which we combine with a flexible non-parametric outcome model to marginalize estimates of causal effects over uncertainty in the structure of interference. Our analysis finds some evidence that emissions controls at upwind power plants reduce asthma ED visits and all-cause mortality, however accounting for uncertainty in the interference renders the results largely inconclusive.
We consider missingness in the context of causal inference when the outcome of interest may be missing. If the outcome directly affects its own missingness status, i.e., it is "self-censoring", this may lead to severely biased causal effect estimates. Miao et al. [2015] proposed the shadow variable method to correct for bias due to self-censoring; however, verifying the required model assumptions can be difficult. Here, we propose a test based on a randomized incentive variable offered to encourage reporting of the outcome that can be used to verify identification assumptions that are sufficient to correct for both self-censoring and confounding bias. Concretely, the test confirms whether a given set of pre-treatment covariates is sufficient to block all backdoor paths between the treatment and outcome as well as all paths between the treatment and missingness indicator after conditioning on the outcome. We show that under these conditions, the causal effect is identified by using the treatment as a shadow variable, and it leads to an intuitive inverse probability weighting estimator that uses a product of the treatment and response weights. We evaluate the efficacy of our test and downstream estimator via simulations.
Understanding causality should be a core requirement of any attempt to build real impact through AI. Due to the inherent unobservability of counterfactuals, large randomised trials (RCTs) are the standard for causal inference. But large experiments are generically expensive, and randomisation carries its own costs, e.g. when suboptimal decisions are trialed. Recent work has proposed more sample-efficient alternatives to RCTs, but these are not adaptable to the downstream application for which the causal effect is sought. In this work, we develop a task-specific approach to experimental design and derive sampling strategies customised to particular downstream applications. Across a range of important tasks, real-world datasets, and sample sizes, our method outperforms other benchmarks, e.g. requiring an order-of-magnitude less data to match RCT performance on targeted marketing tasks.
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