Probabilities of Causation with Nonbinary Treatment and Effect
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2208.09568v1
- Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2022 23:54:47 GMT
- Title: Probabilities of Causation with Nonbinary Treatment and Effect
- Authors: Ang Li and Judea Pearl
- Abstract summary: Tian and Pearl derived sharp bounds for the probability of necessity and sufficiency.
We provide theoretical bounds for all types of probabilities of causation to multivalued treatments and effects.
- Score: 20.750773939911685
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: This paper deals with the problem of estimating the probabilities of
causation when treatment and effect are not binary. Tian and Pearl derived
sharp bounds for the probability of necessity and sufficiency (PNS), the
probability of sufficiency (PS), and the probability of necessity (PN) using
experimental and observational data. In this paper, we provide theoretical
bounds for all types of probabilities of causation to multivalued treatments
and effects. We further discuss examples where our bounds guide practical
decisions and use simulation studies to evaluate how informative the bounds are
for various combinations of data.
Related papers
- Intervention and Conditioning in Causal Bayesian Networks [23.225006087292765]
We show that by making simple yet often realistic independence assumptions, it is possible to estimate the probability of an interventional formula.
In many cases of interest, when the assumptions are appropriate, these probability estimates can be evaluated using observational data.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-23T15:55:38Z) - Tightening Bounds on Probabilities of Causation By Merging Datasets [0.0]
Probabilities of Causation (PoC) play a fundamental role in decision-making in law, health care and public policy.
Existing work to further tighten these bounds by leveraging extra information either provides numerical bounds, symbolic bounds for fixed dimensionality, or requires access to multiple datasets that contain the same treatment and outcome variables.
Here, we provide symbolic bounds on the PoC for a challenging scenario.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-12T15:19:15Z) - Approximating Counterfactual Bounds while Fusing Observational, Biased
and Randomised Data Sources [64.96984404868411]
We address the problem of integrating data from multiple, possibly biased, observational and interventional studies.
We show that the likelihood of the available data has no local maxima.
We then show how the same approach can address the general case of multiple datasets.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-31T11:28:24Z) - 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) - Bounding probabilities of causation through the causal marginal problem [12.542533707005092]
Probabilities of causation play a fundamental role in decision making in law, health care and public policy.
In many clinical trials and public policy evaluation cases, there exist independent datasets that examine the effect of a different treatment each on the same outcome variable.
Here, we outline how to significantly tighten existing bounds on the probabilities of causation, by imposing counterfactual consistency between SCMs constructed from such independent datasets.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-04T12:16:38Z) - Probabilities of Causation: Role of Observational Data [20.750773939911685]
We discuss the conditions that observational data are worth considering to improve the quality of the bounds.
We also apply the proposed theorems to the unit selection problem defined by Li and Pearl.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-10-17T09:10:11Z) - Treatment Effect Risk: Bounds and Inference [58.442274475425144]
Since the average treatment effect measures the change in social welfare, even if positive, there is a risk of negative effect on, say, some 10% of the population.
In this paper we consider how to nonetheless assess this important risk measure, formalized as the conditional value at risk (CVaR) of the ITE distribution.
Some bounds can also be interpreted as summarizing a complex CATE function into a single metric and are of interest independently of being a bound.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-01-15T17:21:26Z) - SurvITE: Learning Heterogeneous Treatment Effects from Time-to-Event
Data [83.50281440043241]
We study the problem of inferring heterogeneous treatment effects from time-to-event data.
We propose a novel deep learning method for treatment-specific hazard estimation based on balancing representations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-10-26T20:13:17Z) - Causes of Effects: Learning individual responses from population data [23.593582720307207]
We study the problem of individualization and its applications in medicine.
For example, the probability of benefiting from a treatment concerns an individual having a favorable outcome if treated and an unfavorable outcome if untreated.
We analyze and expand on existing research by applying bounds to the probability of necessity and sufficiency (PNS) along with graphical criteria and practical applications.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-04-28T12:38:11Z) - Efficient Causal Inference from Combined Observational and
Interventional Data through Causal Reductions [68.6505592770171]
Unobserved confounding is one of the main challenges when estimating causal effects.
We propose a novel causal reduction method that replaces an arbitrary number of possibly high-dimensional latent confounders.
We propose a learning algorithm to estimate the parameterized reduced model jointly from observational and interventional data.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-03-08T14:29:07Z) - Enabling Counterfactual Survival Analysis with Balanced Representations [64.17342727357618]
Survival data are frequently encountered across diverse medical applications, i.e., drug development, risk profiling, and clinical trials.
We propose a theoretically grounded unified framework for counterfactual inference applicable to survival outcomes.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-06-14T01:15:00Z)
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.