Proximal causal inference is a recently proposed framework for evaluating the causal effect of a treatment on an outcome variable in the presence of unmeasured confounding (Miao et al., 2018; Tchetgen Tchetgen et al., 2020). For nonparametric point identification of causal effects, the framework leverages a pair of so-called treatment and outcome confounding proxy variables, in order to identify a bridge function that matches the dependence of potential outcomes or treatment variables on the hidden factors to corresponding functions of observed proxies. Unique identification of a causal effect via a bridge function crucially requires that proxies are sufficiently relevant for hidden factors, a requirement that has previously been formalized as a completeness condition. However, completeness is well-known not to be empirically testable, and although a bridge function may be well-defined in a given setting, lack of completeness, sometimes manifested by availability of a single type of proxy, may severely limit prospects for identification of a bridge function and thus a causal effect; therefore, potentially restricting the application of the proximal causal framework. In this paper, we propose partial identification methods that do not require completeness and obviate the need for identification of a bridge function. That is, we establish that proxies of unobserved confounders can be leveraged to obtain bounds on the causal effect of the treatment on the outcome even if available information does not suffice to identify either a bridge function or a corresponding causal effect of interest. We further establish analogous partial identification results in related settings where identification hinges upon hidden mediators for which proxies are available, however such proxies are not sufficiently rich for point identification of a bridge function or a corresponding causal effect of interest.
相關內容
As society transitions towards an AI-based decision-making infrastructure, an ever-increasing number of decisions once under control of humans are now delegated to automated systems. Even though such developments make various parts of society more efficient, a large body of evidence suggests that a great deal of care needs to be taken to make such automated decision-making systems fair and equitable, namely, taking into account sensitive attributes such as gender, race, and religion. In this paper, we study a specific decision-making task called outcome control in which an automated system aims to optimize an outcome variable $Y$ while being fair and equitable. The interest in such a setting ranges from interventions related to criminal justice and welfare, all the way to clinical decision-making and public health. In this paper, we first analyze through causal lenses the notion of benefit, which captures how much a specific individual would benefit from a positive decision, counterfactually speaking, when contrasted with an alternative, negative one. We introduce the notion of benefit fairness, which can be seen as the minimal fairness requirement in decision-making, and develop an algorithm for satisfying it. We then note that the benefit itself may be influenced by the protected attribute, and propose causal tools which can be used to analyze this. Finally, if some of the variations of the protected attribute in the benefit are considered as discriminatory, the notion of benefit fairness may need to be strengthened, which leads us to articulating a notion of causal benefit fairness. Using this notion, we develop a new optimization procedure capable of maximizing $Y$ while ascertaining causal fairness in the decision process.
Quantum data access and quantum processing can make certain classically intractable learning tasks feasible. However, quantum capabilities will only be available to a select few in the near future. Thus, reliable schemes that allow classical clients to delegate learning to untrusted quantum servers are required to facilitate widespread access to quantum learning advantages. Building on a recently introduced framework of interactive proof systems for classical machine learning, we develop a framework for classical verification of quantum learning. We exhibit learning problems that a classical learner cannot efficiently solve on their own, but that they can efficiently and reliably solve when interacting with an untrusted quantum prover. Concretely, we consider the problems of agnostic learning parities and Fourier-sparse functions with respect to distributions with uniform input marginal. We propose a new quantum data access model that we call "mixture-of-superpositions" quantum examples, based on which we give efficient quantum learning algorithms for these tasks. Moreover, we prove that agnostic quantum parity and Fourier-sparse learning can be efficiently verified by a classical verifier with only random example or statistical query access. Finally, we showcase two general scenarios in learning and verification in which quantum mixture-of-superpositions examples do not lead to sample complexity improvements over classical data. Our results demonstrate that the potential power of quantum data for learning tasks, while not unlimited, can be utilized by classical agents through interaction with untrusted quantum entities.
The estimation of causal effects is a primary goal of behavioral, social, economic and biomedical sciences. Under the unconfoundedness condition, adjustment for confounders requires estimating the nuisance functions relating outcome and/or treatment to confounders. This paper considers a generalized optimization framework for efficient estimation of general treatment effects using feedforward artificial neural networks (ANNs) when the number of covariates is allowed to increase with the sample size. We estimate the nuisance function by ANNs, and develop a new approximation error bound for the ANNs approximators when the nuisance function belongs to a mixed Sobolev space. We show that the ANNs can alleviate the curse of dimensionality under this circumstance. We further establish the consistency and asymptotic normality of the proposed treatment effects estimators, and apply a weighted bootstrap procedure for conducting inference. The proposed methods are illustrated via simulation studies and a real data application.
When estimating treatment effects, the golden standard is to conduct a randomized experiment and then contrast outcomes associated with the treatment group and the control group. However, in many cases, randomized experiments are either conducted with a much smaller scale compared to the size of the target population or accompanied with certain ethical issues and thus hard to implement. Therefore, researchers usually rely on observational data to study causal connections. The downside is that the unconfoundedness assumption, the key to validate the use of observational data is hard to verify and almost always violated. Hence, any conclusion drawn from observational data should be further analyzed with great care. Given the richness of observational data and usefulness of experimental data, researchers hope to develop credible method to combine the strength of the two. In this paper, we consider a setting where the observational data contain the outcome of interest as well as a surrogate outcome while the experimental data contain only the surrogate outcome. We propose a simple estimator to estimate the average treatment effect of interest using both the observational data and the experimental data.
This paper provides a general framework for testing instrument validity in heterogeneous causal effect models. The generalization includes the cases where the treatment can be multivalued ordered or unordered. Based on a series of testable implications, we propose a nonparametric test which is proved to be asymptotically size controlled and consistent. Compared to the tests in the literature, our test can be applied in more general settings and may achieve power improvement. Refutation of instrument validity by the test helps detect invalid instruments that may yield implausible results on causal effects. Evidence that the test performs well on finite samples is provided via simulations. We revisit the empirical study on return to schooling to demonstrate application of the proposed test in practice. An extended continuous mapping theorem and an extended delta method, which may be of independent interest, are provided to establish the asymptotic distribution of the test statistic under null.
Personalized treatment effect estimates are often of interest in high-stakes applications -- thus, before deploying a model estimating such effects in practice, one needs to be sure that the best candidate from the ever-growing machine learning toolbox for this task was chosen. Unfortunately, due to the absence of counterfactual information in practice, it is usually not possible to rely on standard validation metrics for doing so, leading to a well-known model selection dilemma in the treatment effect estimation literature. While some solutions have recently been investigated, systematic understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of different model selection criteria is still lacking. In this paper, instead of attempting to declare a global `winner', we therefore empirically investigate success- and failure modes of different selection criteria. We highlight that there is a complex interplay between selection strategies, candidate estimators and the data used for comparing them, and provide interesting insights into the relative (dis)advantages of different criteria alongside desiderata for the design of further illuminating empirical studies in this context.
In the era of big data, the ubiquity of location-aware portable devices provides an unprecedented opportunity to understand inhabitants' behavior and their interactions with the built environments. Among the widely used data resources, mobile phone data is the one passively collected and has the largest coverage in the population. However, mobile operators cannot pinpoint one user within meters, leading to the difficulties in activity inference. To that end, we propose a data analysis framework to identify user's activity via coupling the mobile phone data with location-based social networks (LBSN) data. The two datasets are integrated into a Bayesian inference module, considering people's circadian rhythms in both time and space. Specifically, the framework considers the pattern of arrival time to each type of facility and the spatial distribution of facilities. The former can be observed from the LBSN Data and the latter is provided by the points of interest (POIs) dataset. Taking Shanghai as an example, we reconstruct the activity chains of 1,000,000 active mobile phone users and analyze the temporal and spatial characteristics of each activity type. We assess the results with some official surveys and a real-world check-in dataset collected in Shanghai, indicating that the proposed method can capture and analyze human activities effectively. Next, we cluster users' inferred activity chains with a topic model to understand the behavior of different groups of users. This data analysis framework provides an example of reconstructing and understanding the activity of the population at an urban scale with big data fusion.
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.
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191