Causal Machine Learning for Moderation Effects

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.08290v3
• Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2025 10:13:29 GMT
• Title: Causal Machine Learning for Moderation Effects
• Authors: Nora Bearth, Michael Lechner,
• Abstract summary: We propose a new parameter, the balanced group average treatment effect (BGATE), which measures a group average treatment effect (GATE) Main estimation strategy is based on double/debiased machine learning for discrete treatments in an unconfoundedness setting. We propose two additional estimation strategies: automatic debiased machine learning and a specific reweighting procedure.
• Score: 0.0
• License:
• Abstract: It is valuable for any decision maker to know the impact of decisions (treatments) on average and for subgroups. The causal machine learning literature has recently provided tools for estimating group average treatment effects (GATE) to better describe treatment heterogeneity. This paper addresses the challenge of interpreting such differences in treatment effects between groups while accounting for variations in other covariates. We propose a new parameter, the balanced group average treatment effect (BGATE), which measures a GATE with a specific distribution of a priori-determined covariates. By taking the difference between two BGATEs, we can analyze heterogeneity more meaningfully than by comparing two GATEs, as we can separate the difference due to the different distributions of other variables and the difference due to the variable of interest. The main estimation strategy for this parameter is based on double/debiased machine learning for discrete treatments in an unconfoundedness setting, and the estimator is shown to be $\sqrt{N}$-consistent and asymptotically normal under standard conditions. We propose two additional estimation strategies: automatic debiased machine learning and a specific reweighting procedure. Last, we demonstrate the usefulness of these parameters in a small-scale simulation study and in an empirical example.

Related papers

• Causal vs. Anticausal merging of predictors [57.26526031579287]
  We study the differences arising from merging predictors in the causal and anticausal directions using the same data. We use Causal Maximum Entropy (CMAXENT) as inductive bias to merge the predictors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-14T20:38:15Z)
• Improving Bias Correction Standards by Quantifying its Effects on Treatment Outcomes [54.18828236350544]
  Propensity score matching (PSM) addresses selection biases by selecting comparable populations for analysis. Different matching methods can produce significantly different Average Treatment Effects (ATE) for the same task, even when meeting all validation criteria. To address this issue, we introduce a novel metric, A2A, to reduce the number of valid matches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T12:42:24Z)
• Geodesic Optimization for Predictive Shift Adaptation on EEG data [53.58711912565724]
  Domain adaptation methods struggle when distribution shifts occur simultaneously in $X$ and $y$. This paper proposes a novel method termed Geodesic Optimization for Predictive Shift Adaptation (GOPSA) to address test-time multi-source DA. GOPSA has the potential to combine the advantages of mixed-effects modeling with machine learning for biomedical applications of EEG.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-04T12:15:42Z)
• CATE Lasso: Conditional Average Treatment Effect Estimation with High-Dimensional Linear Regression [18.628644958430076]
  Conditional Average Treatment Effects (CATEs) play an important role as a quantity representing an individualized causal effect. We propose a method for consistently estimating CATEs even under high-dimensional and non-sparse parameters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-25T17:51:07Z)
• Environment Invariant Linear Least Squares [16.831875263656027]
  This paper considers a multi-environment linear regression model in which data from multiple experimental settings are collected. We construct a novel environment invariant linear least squares (EILLS) objective function, a multi-environment version of linear least-squares regression.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-06T13:10:54Z)
• Generalization bounds and algorithms for estimating conditional average treatment effect of dosage [13.867315751451494]
  We investigate the task of estimating the conditional average causal effect of treatment-dosage pairs from a combination of observational data and assumptions on the causal relationships in the underlying system. This has been a longstanding challenge for fields of study such as epidemiology or economics that require a treatment-dosage pair to make decisions. We show empirically new state-of-the-art performance results across several benchmark datasets for this problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-29T15:26:59Z)
• Robust and Agnostic Learning of Conditional Distributional Treatment Effects [62.44901952244514]
  The conditional average treatment effect (CATE) is the best point prediction of individual causal effects. In aggregate analyses, this is usually addressed by measuring distributional treatment effect (DTE) We provide a new robust and model-agnostic methodology for learning the conditional DTE (CDTE) for a wide class of problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-23T17:40:31Z)
• Variance Minimization in the Wasserstein Space for Invariant Causal Prediction [72.13445677280792]
  In this work, we show that the approach taken in ICP may be reformulated as a series of nonparametric tests that scales linearly in the number of predictors. Each of these tests relies on the minimization of a novel loss function that is derived from tools in optimal transport theory. We prove under mild assumptions that our method is able to recover the set of identifiable direct causes, and we demonstrate in our experiments that it is competitive with other benchmark causal discovery algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-13T22:30:47Z)
• Variable selection with missing data in both covariates and outcomes: Imputation and machine learning [1.0333430439241666]
  The missing data issue is ubiquitous in health studies. Machine learning methods weaken parametric assumptions. XGBoost and BART have the overall best performance across various settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-06T20:18:29Z)
• Double machine learning for sample selection models [0.12891210250935145]
  This paper considers the evaluation of discretely distributed treatments when outcomes are only observed for a subpopulation due to sample selection or outcome attrition. We make use of (a) Neyman-orthogonal, doubly robust, and efficient score functions, which imply the robustness of treatment effect estimation to moderate regularization biases in the machine learning-based estimation of the outcome, treatment, or sample selection models and (b) sample splitting (or cross-fitting) to prevent overfitting bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-30T19:40:21Z)
• Decision-Making with Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes [71.44735417472043]
  We show that a posterior approximation distinct from the variational distribution should be used for making decisions. Motivated by these theoretical results, we propose learning several approximate proposals for the best model. In addition to toy examples, we present a full-fledged case study of single-cell RNA sequencing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-17T19:23:36Z)

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.