Improving Data-driven Heterogeneous Treatment Effect Estimation Under Structure Uncertainty

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2206.12689v1
• Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2022 16:26:35 GMT
• Title: Improving Data-driven Heterogeneous Treatment Effect Estimation Under Structure Uncertainty
• Authors: Christopher Tran, Elena Zheleva
• Abstract summary: Estimating how a treatment affects units individually, known as heterogeneous treatment effect (HTE) estimation, is an essential part of decision-making and policy implementation. We develop a feature selection method that considers each feature's value for HTE estimation and learns the relevant parts of the causal structure from data.
• Score: 13.452510519858995
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Estimating how a treatment affects units individually, known as heterogeneous treatment effect (HTE) estimation, is an essential part of decision-making and policy implementation. The accumulation of large amounts of data in many domains, such as healthcare and e-commerce, has led to increased interest in developing data-driven algorithms for estimating heterogeneous effects from observational and experimental data. However, these methods often make strong assumptions about the observed features and ignore the underlying causal model structure, which can lead to biased HTE estimation. At the same time, accounting for the causal structure of real-world data is rarely trivial since the causal mechanisms that gave rise to the data are typically unknown. To address this problem, we develop a feature selection method that considers each feature's value for HTE estimation and learns the relevant parts of the causal structure from data. We provide strong empirical evidence that our method improves existing data-driven HTE estimation methods under arbitrary underlying causal structures. Our results on synthetic, semi-synthetic, and real-world datasets show that our feature selection algorithm leads to lower HTE estimation error.

Related papers

• Counterfactual Data Augmentation with Contrastive Learning [27.28511396131235]
  We introduce a model-agnostic data augmentation method that imputes the counterfactual outcomes for a selected subset of individuals. We use contrastive learning to learn a representation space and a similarity measure such that in the learned representation space close individuals identified by the learned similarity measure have similar potential outcomes. This property ensures reliable imputation of counterfactual outcomes for the individuals with close neighbors from the alternative treatment group.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-07T00:36:51Z)
• B-Learner: Quasi-Oracle Bounds on Heterogeneous Causal Effects Under Hidden Confounding [51.74479522965712]
  We propose a meta-learner called the B-Learner, which can efficiently learn sharp bounds on the CATE function under limits on hidden confounding. We prove its estimates are valid, sharp, efficient, and have a quasi-oracle property with respect to the constituent estimators under more general conditions than existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-20T18:07:19Z)
• Data-Driven Estimation of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects [12.746252866743385]
  Estimating how a treatment affects different individuals, known as heterogeneous treatment effect estimation, is an important problem in empirical sciences. We provide a survey of state-of-the-art data-driven methods for heterogeneous treatment effect estimation using machine learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-16T21:36:49Z)
• Combining Observational and Randomized Data for Estimating Heterogeneous Treatment Effects [82.20189909620899]
  Estimating heterogeneous treatment effects is an important problem across many domains. Currently, most existing works rely exclusively on observational data. We propose to estimate heterogeneous treatment effects by combining large amounts of observational data and small amounts of randomized data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-25T18:59:54Z)
• Evaluating Causal Inference Methods [0.4588028371034407]
  We introduce a deep generative model-based framework, Credence, to validate causal inference methods. Our work introduces a deep generative model-based framework, Credence, to validate causal inference methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-09T00:21:22Z)
• MIRACLE: Causally-Aware Imputation via Learning Missing Data Mechanisms [82.90843777097606]
  We propose a causally-aware imputation algorithm (MIRACLE) for missing data. MIRACLE iteratively refines the imputation of a baseline by simultaneously modeling the missingness generating mechanism. We conduct extensive experiments on synthetic and a variety of publicly available datasets to show that MIRACLE is able to consistently improve imputation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-04T22:38:18Z)
• Learning Neural Causal Models with Active Interventions [83.44636110899742]
  We introduce an active intervention-targeting mechanism which enables a quick identification of the underlying causal structure of the data-generating process. Our method significantly reduces the required number of interactions compared with random intervention targeting. We demonstrate superior performance on multiple benchmarks from simulated to real-world data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-06T13:10:37Z)
• Doing Great at Estimating CATE? On the Neglected Assumptions in Benchmark Comparisons of Treatment Effect Estimators [91.3755431537592]
  We show that even in arguably the simplest setting, estimation under ignorability assumptions can be misleading. We consider two popular machine learning benchmark datasets for evaluation of heterogeneous treatment effect estimators. We highlight that the inherent characteristics of the benchmark datasets favor some algorithms over others.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-28T13:21:27Z)
• Multi-Source Causal Inference Using Control Variates [81.57072928775509]
  We propose a general algorithm to estimate causal effects from emphmultiple data sources. We show theoretically that this reduces the variance of the ATE estimate. We apply this framework to inference from observational data under an outcome selection bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-30T21:20:51Z)
• How and Why to Use Experimental Data to Evaluate Methods for Observational Causal Inference [7.551130027327462]
  We describe and analyze observational sampling from randomized controlled trials (OSRCT) This method can be used to create constructed observational data sets with corresponding unbiased estimates of treatment effect. We then perform a large-scale evaluation of seven causal inference methods over 37 data sets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-06T21:44:01Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.