Coarsened confounding for causal effects: a large-sample framework

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.03129v1
• Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 16:47:24 GMT
• Title: Coarsened confounding for causal effects: a large-sample framework
• Authors: Debashis Ghosh, Lei Wang,
• Abstract summary: We consider coarsened exact matching, developed in Iacus et al.<n>This methodology is generalized to what we termed as coarsened confounding, for which we propose two new algorithms.<n>A bias correction technique is proposed, and we apply the proposed methodology to data from two well-known observational studi
• Score: 3.9483979013722683
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: There has been widespread use of causal inference methods for the rigorous analysis of observational studies and to identify policy evaluations. In this article, we consider coarsened exact matching, developed in Iacus et al. (2011). While they developed some statistical properties, in this article, we study the approach using asymptotics based on a superpopulation inferential framework. This methodology is generalized to what we termed as coarsened confounding, for which we propose two new algorithms. We develop asymptotic results for the average causal effect estimator as well as providing conditions for consistency. In addition, we provide an asymptotic justification for the variance formulae in Iacus et al. (2011). A bias correction technique is proposed, and we apply the proposed methodology to data from two well-known observational studi

Related papers

• An extensive simulation study evaluating the interaction of resampling techniques across multiple causal discovery contexts [2.0946534289186842]
  We present theoretical results proving that certain resampling methods emulate the assignment of specific values to algorithm tuning parameters. We also report the results of extensive simulation experiments, which verify the theoretical result and provide substantial data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-19T17:18:18Z)
• Black Box Causal Inference: Effect Estimation via Meta Prediction [56.277798874118425]
  We frame causal inference as a dataset-level prediction problem, offloading algorithm design to the learning process. We introduce, called black box causal inference (BBCI), builds estimators in a black-box manner by learning to predict causal effects from sampled dataset-effect pairs. We demonstrate accurate estimation of average treatment effects (ATEs) and conditional average treatment effects (CATEs) with BBCI across several causal inference problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-07T23:43:19Z)
• Off-policy estimation with adaptively collected data: the power of online learning [20.023469636707635]
  We consider estimation of a linear functional of the treatment effect using adaptively collected data. We propose a general reduction scheme that allows one to produce a sequence of estimates for the treatment effect via online learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-19T10:18:27Z)
• Exogenous Matching: Learning Good Proposals for Tractable Counterfactual Estimation [1.9662978733004601]
  We propose an importance sampling method for tractable and efficient estimation of counterfactual expressions.<n>By minimizing a common upper bound of counterfactual estimators, we transform the variance minimization problem into a conditional distribution learning problem.<n>We validate the theoretical results through experiments under various types and settings of Structural Causal Models (SCMs) and demonstrate the outperformance on counterfactual estimation tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T03:08:28Z)
• Estimation of multiple mean vectors in high dimension [4.2466572124753]
  We endeavour to estimate numerous multi-dimensional means of various probability distributions on a common space based on independent samples. Our approach involves forming estimators through convex combinations of empirical means derived from these samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-22T08:42:41Z)
• Flexible Nonparametric Inference for Causal Effects under the Front-Door Model [2.6900047294457683]
  We develop novel one-step and targeted minimum loss-based estimators for both the average treatment effect and the average treatment effect on the treated under front-door assumptions.<n>Our estimators are built on multiple parameterizations of the observed data distribution, including approaches that avoid mediator density entirely.<n>We show how these constraints can be leveraged to improve the efficiency of causal effect estimators.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-15T22:04:53Z)
• Benchmarking Bayesian Causal Discovery Methods for Downstream Treatment Effect Estimation [137.3520153445413]
  A notable gap exists in the evaluation of causal discovery methods, where insufficient emphasis is placed on downstream inference. We evaluate seven established baseline causal discovery methods including a newly proposed method based on GFlowNets. The results of our study demonstrate that some of the algorithms studied are able to effectively capture a wide range of useful and diverse ATE modes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-11T02:58:10Z)
• Distributionally Robust Causal Inference with Observational Data [4.8986598953553555]
  We consider the estimation of average treatment effects in observational studies without the standard assumption of unconfoundedness. We propose a new framework of robust causal inference under the general observational study setting with the possible existence of unobserved confounders.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-15T16:02:33Z)
• 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)
• Mitigating multiple descents: A model-agnostic framework for risk monotonization [84.6382406922369]
  We develop a general framework for risk monotonization based on cross-validation. We propose two data-driven methodologies, namely zero- and one-step, that are akin to bagging and boosting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-25T17:41:40Z)
• Comparing two samples through stochastic dominance: a graphical approach [2.867517731896504]
  Non-deterministic measurements are common in real-world scenarios. We propose an alternative framework to visually compare two samples according to their estimated cumulative distribution functions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-15T13:37:03Z)
• 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)
• Heavy-tailed Streaming Statistical Estimation [58.70341336199497]
  We consider the task of heavy-tailed statistical estimation given streaming $p$ samples. We design a clipped gradient descent and provide an improved analysis under a more nuanced condition on the noise of gradients.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-25T21:30:27Z)
• Bayesian prognostic covariate adjustment [59.75318183140857]
  Historical data about disease outcomes can be integrated into the analysis of clinical trials in many ways. We build on existing literature that uses prognostic scores from a predictive model to increase the efficiency of treatment effect estimates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-24T05:19:03Z)
• Double Robust Representation Learning for Counterfactual Prediction [68.78210173955001]
  We propose a novel scalable method to learn double-robust representations for counterfactual predictions. We make robust and efficient counterfactual predictions for both individual and average treatment effects. The algorithm shows competitive performance with the state-of-the-art on real world and synthetic data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-15T16:39:26Z)
• A One-step Approach to Covariate Shift Adaptation [82.01909503235385]
  A default assumption in many machine learning scenarios is that the training and test samples are drawn from the same probability distribution. We propose a novel one-step approach that jointly learns the predictive model and the associated weights in one optimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-08T11:35:47Z)
• Compressing Large Sample Data for Discriminant Analysis [78.12073412066698]
  We consider the computational issues due to large sample size within the discriminant analysis framework. We propose a new compression approach for reducing the number of training samples for linear and quadratic discriminant analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-08T05:09:08Z)
• Causal Inference under Outcome-Based Sampling with Monotonicity Assumptions [0.0]
  We study causal inference under case-control and case-population sampling. We show that strong ignorability is not always as powerful as it is under random sampling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-17T16:01:34Z)
• A Survey on Causal Inference [64.45536158710014]
  Causal inference is a critical research topic across many domains, such as statistics, computer science, education, public policy and economics. Various causal effect estimation methods for observational data have sprung up.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-05T21:35:29Z)

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.