亚洲男人的天堂2018av,欧美草比,久久久久久免费视频精选,国色天香在线看免费,久久久久亚洲av成人片仓井空

Mendelian randomization (MR) is a widely-used method to estimate the causal relationship between a risk factor and disease. A fundamental part of any MR analysis is to choose appropriate genetic variants as instrumental variables. Genome-wide association studies often reveal that hundreds of genetic variants may be robustly associated with a risk factor, but in some situations investigators may have greater confidence in the instrument validity of only a smaller subset of variants. Nevertheless, the use of additional instruments may be optimal from the perspective of mean squared error even if they are slightly invalid; a small bias in estimation may be a price worth paying for a larger reduction in variance. For this purpose, we consider a method for "focused" instrument selection whereby genetic variants are selected to minimise the estimated asymptotic mean squared error of causal effect estimates. In a setting of many weak and locally invalid instruments, we propose a novel strategy to construct confidence intervals for post-selection focused estimators that guards against the worst case loss in asymptotic coverage. In empirical applications to: (i) validate lipid drug targets; and (ii) investigate vitamin D effects on a wide range of outcomes, our findings suggest that the optimal selection of instruments does not involve only a small number of biologically-justified instruments, but also many potentially invalid instruments.

Functional data is a powerful tool for capturing and analyzing complex patterns and relationships in a variety of fields, allowing for more precise modeling, visualization, and decision-making. For example, in healthcare, functional data such as medical images can help doctors make more accurate diagnoses and develop more effective treatment plans. However, understanding the causal relationships between functional predictors and time-to-event outcomes remains a challenge. To address this, we propose a functional causal framework including a functional accelerated failure time (FAFT) model and three causal approaches. The regression adjustment approach is based on conditional FAFT with subsequent confounding marginalization, while the functional-inverse-probability-weighting approach is based on marginal FAFT with well-defined functional propensity scores. The double robust approach combines the strengths of both methods and achieves a balance condition through the weighted residuals between imputed observations and regression adjustment outcomes. Our approach can accurately estimate causality, predict outcomes, and is robust to different censoring rates. We demonstrate the power of our framework with simulations and real-world data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) study. Our findings provide more precise subregions of the hippocampus that align with medical research, highlighting the power of this work for improving healthcare outcomes.

Conditional effect estimation has great scientific and policy importance because interventions may impact subjects differently depending on their characteristics. Most research has focused on estimating the conditional average treatment effect (CATE). However, identification of the CATE requires all subjects have a non-zero probability of receiving treatment, or positivity, which may be unrealistic in practice. Instead, we propose conditional effects based on incremental propensity score interventions, which are stochastic interventions where the odds of treatment are multiplied by some factor. These effects do not require positivity for identification and can be better suited for modeling scenarios in which people cannot be forced into treatment. We develop a projection estimator and a flexible nonparametric estimator that can each estimate all the conditional effects we propose and derive model-agnostic error guarantees showing both estimators satisfy a form of double robustness. Further, we propose a summary of treatment effect heterogeneity and a test for any effect heterogeneity based on the variance of a conditional derivative effect and derive a nonparametric estimator that also satisfies a form of double robustness. Finally, we demonstrate our estimators by analyzing the effect of intensive care unit admission on mortality using a dataset from the (SPOT)light study.

When estimating quantities and fields that are difficult to measure directly, such as the fluidity of ice, from point data sources, such as satellite altimetry, it is important to solve a numerical inverse problem that is formulated with Bayesian consistency. Otherwise, the resultant probability density function for the difficult to measure quantity or field will not be appropriately clustered around the truth. In particular, the inverse problem should be formulated by evaluating the numerical solution at the true point locations for direct comparison with the point data source. If the data are first fitted to a gridded or meshed field on the computational grid or mesh, and the inverse problem formulated by comparing the numerical solution to the fitted field, the benefits of additional point data values below the grid density will be lost. We demonstrate, with examples in the fields of groundwater hydrology and glaciology, that a consistent formulation can increase the accuracy of results and aid discourse between modellers and observationalists. To do this, we bring point data into the finite element method ecosystem as discontinuous fields on meshes of disconnected vertices. Point evaluation can then be formulated as a finite element interpolation operation (dual-evaluation). This new abstraction is well-suited to automation, including automatic differentiation. We demonstrate this through implementation in Firedrake, which generates highly optimised code for solving PDEs with the finite element method. Our solution integrates with dolfin-adjoint/pyadjoint, allowing PDE-constrained optimisation problems, such as data assimilation, to be solved through forward and adjoint mode automatic differentiation.

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.

Understanding causality helps to structure interventions to achieve specific goals and enables predictions under interventions. With the growing importance of learning causal relationships, causal discovery tasks have transitioned from using traditional methods to infer potential causal structures from observational data to the field of pattern recognition involved in deep learning. The rapid accumulation of massive data promotes the emergence of causal search methods with brilliant scalability. Existing summaries of causal discovery methods mainly focus on traditional methods based on constraints, scores and FCMs, there is a lack of perfect sorting and elaboration for deep learning-based methods, also lacking some considers and exploration of causal discovery methods from the perspective of variable paradigms. Therefore, we divide the possible causal discovery tasks into three types according to the variable paradigm and give the definitions of the three tasks respectively, define and instantiate the relevant datasets for each task and the final causal model constructed at the same time, then reviews the main existing causal discovery methods for different tasks. Finally, we propose some roadmaps from different perspectives for the current research gaps in the field of causal discovery and point out future research directions.

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.

As data are increasingly being stored in different silos and societies becoming more aware of data privacy issues, the traditional centralized training of artificial intelligence (AI) models is facing efficiency and privacy challenges. Recently, federated learning (FL) has emerged as an alternative solution and continue to thrive in this new reality. Existing FL protocol design has been shown to be vulnerable to adversaries within or outside of the system, compromising data privacy and system robustness. Besides training powerful global models, it is of paramount importance to design FL systems that have privacy guarantees and are resistant to different types of adversaries. In this paper, we conduct the first comprehensive survey on this topic. Through a concise introduction to the concept of FL, and a unique taxonomy covering: 1) threat models; 2) poisoning attacks and defenses against robustness; 3) inference attacks and defenses against privacy, we provide an accessible review of this important topic. We highlight the intuitions, key techniques as well as fundamental assumptions adopted by various attacks and defenses. Finally, we discuss promising future research directions towards robust and privacy-preserving federated learning.

Current deep learning research is dominated by benchmark evaluation. A method is regarded as favorable if it empirically performs well on the dedicated test set. This mentality is seamlessly reflected in the resurfacing area of continual learning, where consecutively arriving sets of benchmark data are investigated. The core challenge is framed as protecting previously acquired representations from being catastrophically forgotten due to the iterative parameter updates. However, comparison of individual methods is nevertheless treated in isolation from real world application and typically judged by monitoring accumulated test set performance. The closed world assumption remains predominant. It is assumed that during deployment a model is guaranteed to encounter data that stems from the same distribution as used for training. This poses a massive challenge as neural networks are well known to provide overconfident false predictions on unknown instances and break down in the face of corrupted data. In this work we argue that notable lessons from open set recognition, the identification of statistically deviating data outside of the observed dataset, and the adjacent field of active learning, where data is incrementally queried such that the expected performance gain is maximized, are frequently overlooked in the deep learning era. Based on these forgotten lessons, we propose a consolidated view to bridge continual learning, active learning and open set recognition in deep neural networks. Our results show that this not only benefits each individual paradigm, but highlights the natural synergies in a common framework. We empirically demonstrate improvements when alleviating catastrophic forgetting, querying data in active learning, selecting task orders, while exhibiting robust open world application where previously proposed methods fail.

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.