Comparing Targeting Strategies for Maximizing Social Welfare with Limited Resources

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.07414v2
• Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 08:34:26 GMT
• Title: Comparing Targeting Strategies for Maximizing Social Welfare with Limited Resources
• Authors: Vibhhu Sharma, Bryan Wilder,
• Abstract summary: Policymakers rarely have access to data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that would enable accurate estimates of which individuals would benefit more from the intervention.<n> Practitioners instead commonly use a technique termed risk-based targeting" where the model is just used to predict each individual's status quo outcome.<n>There is currently almost no empirical evidence to inform which choices lead to the most effective machine learning-informed targeting strategies.
• Score: 20.99198458867724
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Machine learning is increasingly used to select which individuals receive limited-resource interventions in domains such as human services, education, development, and more. However, it is often not apparent what the right quantity is for models to predict. Policymakers rarely have access to data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that would enable accurate estimates of which individuals would benefit more from the intervention, while observational data creates a substantial risk of bias in treatment effect estimates. Practitioners instead commonly use a technique termed ``risk-based targeting" where the model is just used to predict each individual's status quo outcome (an easier, non-causal task). Those with higher predicted risk are offered treatment. There is currently almost no empirical evidence to inform which choices lead to the most effective machine learning-informed targeting strategies in social domains. In this work, we use data from 5 real-world RCTs in a variety of domains to empirically assess such choices. We find that when treatment effects can be estimated with high accuracy (which we simulate by allowing the model to partially observe outcomes in advance), treatment effect based targeting substantially outperforms risk-based targeting, even when treatment effect estimates are biased. Moreover, these results hold even when the policymaker has strong normative preferences for assisting higher-risk individuals. However, the features and data actually available in most RCTs we examine do not suffice for accurate estimates of heterogeneous treatment effects. Our results suggest treatment effect targeting has significant potential benefits, but realizing these benefits requires improvements to data collection and model training beyond what is currently common in practice.

Related papers

• Statistical Learning for Heterogeneous Treatment Effects: Pretraining, Prognosis, and Prediction [40.96453902709292]
  We propose pretraining strategies that leverage a phenomenon in real-world applications. In medicine, components of the same biological signaling pathways frequently influence both baseline risk and treatment response. We use this structure to incorporate "side information" and develop models that can exploit synergies between risk prediction and causal effect estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-01T05:12:14Z)
• Are causal effect estimations enough for optimal recommendations under multitreatment scenarios? [2.4578723416255754]
  It is essential to include a causal effect estimation analysis to compare potential outcomes under different treatments or controls. We propose a comprehensive methodology for multitreatment selection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-07T16:37:35Z)
• A Game-Theoretic Approach to Privacy-Utility Tradeoff in Sharing Genomic Summary Statistics [24.330984323956173]
  We propose a game-theoretic framework for optimal privacy-utility tradeoffs in the sharing of genomic summary statistics. Our experiments demonstrate that the proposed framework yields both stronger attacks and stronger defense strategies than the state of the art.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-03T22:09:47Z)
• Reduced-Rank Multi-objective Policy Learning and Optimization [57.978477569678844]
  In practice, causal researchers do not have a single outcome in mind a priori. In government-assisted social benefit programs, policymakers collect many outcomes to understand the multidimensional nature of poverty. We present a data-driven dimensionality-reduction methodology for multiple outcomes in the context of optimal policy learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-29T08:16:30Z)
• Defining Expertise: Applications to Treatment Effect Estimation [58.7977683502207]
  We argue that expertise - particularly the type of expertise the decision-makers of a domain are likely to have - can be informative in designing and selecting methods for treatment effect estimation. We define two types of expertise, predictive and prognostic, and demonstrate empirically that: (i) the prominent type of expertise in a domain significantly influences the performance of different methods in treatment effect estimation, and (ii) it is possible to predict the type of expertise present in a dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-01T17:30:49Z)
• Targeted Machine Learning for Average Causal Effect Estimation Using the Front-Door Functional [3.0232957374216953]
  evaluating the average causal effect (ACE) of a treatment on an outcome often involves overcoming the challenges posed by confounding factors in observational studies. Here, we introduce novel estimation strategies for the front-door criterion based on the targeted minimum loss-based estimation theory. We demonstrate the applicability of these estimators to analyze the effect of early stage academic performance on future yearly income.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-15T22:04:53Z)
• 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)
• ASPEST: Bridging the Gap Between Active Learning and Selective Prediction [56.001808843574395]
  Selective prediction aims to learn a reliable model that abstains from making predictions when uncertain. Active learning aims to lower the overall labeling effort, and hence human dependence, by querying the most informative examples. In this work, we introduce a new learning paradigm, active selective prediction, which aims to query more informative samples from the shifted target domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-07T23:51:07Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• A New Approach for Interpretability and Reliability in Clinical Risk Prediction: Acute Coronary Syndrome Scenario [0.33927193323747895]
  We intend to create a new risk assessment methodology that combines the best characteristics of both risk score and machine learning models. The proposed approach achieved testing results identical to the standard LR, but offers superior interpretability and personalization. The reliability estimation of individual predictions presented a great correlation with the misclassifications rate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-15T19:33:46Z)
• Bootstrapping Your Own Positive Sample: Contrastive Learning With Electronic Health Record Data [62.29031007761901]
  This paper proposes a novel contrastive regularized clinical classification model. We introduce two unique positive sampling strategies specifically tailored for EHR data. Our framework yields highly competitive experimental results in predicting the mortality risk on real-world COVID-19 EHR data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-07T06:02:04Z)
• Impact of Interventional Policies Including Vaccine on Covid-19 Propagation and Socio-Economic Factors [0.7874708385247353]
  This study aims to provide a predictive analytics framework to model, predict and simulate COVID-19 propagation and socio-economic impact. We have leveraged a recently launched open-source COVID-19 big data platform and used published research to find potentially relevant variables. An advanced machine learning pipeline has been developed armed with a self-evolving model, deployed on a modern machine learning architecture.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-11T15:08:07Z)
• UNITE: Uncertainty-based Health Risk Prediction Leveraging Multi-sourced Data [81.00385374948125]
  We present UNcertaInTy-based hEalth risk prediction (UNITE) model. UNITE provides accurate disease risk prediction and uncertainty estimation leveraging multi-sourced health data. We evaluate UNITE on real-world disease risk prediction tasks: nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NASH) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) UNITE achieves up to 0.841 in F1 score for AD detection, up to 0.609 in PR-AUC for NASH detection, and outperforms various state-of-the-art baselines by up to $19%$ over the best baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-22T02:28:11Z)
• Epidemic mitigation by statistical inference from contact tracing data [61.04165571425021]
  We develop Bayesian inference methods to estimate the risk that an individual is infected. We propose to use probabilistic risk estimation in order to optimize testing and quarantining strategies for the control of an epidemic. Our approaches translate into fully distributed algorithms that only require communication between individuals who have recently been in contact.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-20T12:24:45Z)
• 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)
• Data-driven Simulation and Optimization for Covid-19 Exit Strategies [16.31545249131776]
  The rapid spread of the Coronavirus SARS-2 is a major challenge that led almost all governments worldwide to take drastic measures to respond to the tragedy. We have built a pandemic simulation and forecasting toolkit that combines a deep learning estimation of the epidemiological parameters of the disease.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-12T11:18:25Z)
• Regret Minimization for Causal Inference on Large Treatment Space [21.957539112375496]
  We propose a network architecture and a regularizer that extracts a debiased representation from biased observational data. Our proposed loss minimizes a classification error of whether or not the action is relatively good for the individual target.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-10T02:19:48Z)

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.