Potential Outcome Rankings for Counterfactual Decision Making

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.10776v1
• Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2025 19:58:19 GMT
• Title: Potential Outcome Rankings for Counterfactual Decision Making
• Authors: Yuta Kawakami, Jin Tian,
• Abstract summary: We study new counterfactual decision-making rules by introducing two new metrics.<n>PoR reveals the most probable ranking of potential outcomes for an individual.<n>PoB indicates the action most likely to yield the top-ranked outcome for an individual.
• Score: 13.227097895806734
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Counterfactual decision-making in the face of uncertainty involves selecting the optimal action from several alternatives using causal reasoning. Decision-makers often rank expected potential outcomes (or their corresponding utility and desirability) to compare the preferences of candidate actions. In this paper, we study new counterfactual decision-making rules by introducing two new metrics: the probabilities of potential outcome ranking (PoR) and the probability of achieving the best potential outcome (PoB). PoR reveals the most probable ranking of potential outcomes for an individual, and PoB indicates the action most likely to yield the top-ranked outcome for an individual. We then establish identification theorems and derive bounds for these metrics, and present estimation methods. Finally, we perform numerical experiments to illustrate the finite-sample properties of the estimators and demonstrate their application to a real-world dataset.

Related papers

• A Principled Approach to Randomized Selection under Uncertainty: Applications to Peer Review and Grant Funding [61.86327960322782]
  We propose a principled framework for randomized decision-making based on interval estimates of the quality of each item.<n>We introduce MERIT, an optimization-based method that maximizes the worst-case expected number of top candidates selected.<n>We prove that MERIT satisfies desirable axiomatic properties not guaranteed by existing approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-23T19:59:30Z)
• Treatment Effect Estimation for Optimal Decision-Making [65.30942348196443]
  We study optimal decision-making based on two-stage CATE estimators.<n>We propose a novel two-stage learning objective that retargets the CATE to balance CATE estimation error and decision performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-19T13:24:57Z)
• 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)
• Optimal Policy Learning with Observational Data in Multi-Action Scenarios: Estimation, Risk Preference, and Potential Failures [0.0]
  This paper deals with optimal policy learning with observational data. It is organized in three parts, where I discuss respectively: estimation, risk preference, and potential failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-29T15:55:06Z)
• Improved Policy Evaluation for Randomized Trials of Algorithmic Resource Allocation [54.72195809248172]
  We present a new estimator leveraging our proposed novel concept, that involves retrospective reshuffling of participants across experimental arms at the end of an RCT. We prove theoretically that such an estimator is more accurate than common estimators based on sample means.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-06T05:17:22Z)
• Quantile Off-Policy Evaluation via Deep Conditional Generative Learning [21.448553360543478]
  Off-Policy evaluation (OPE) is concerned with evaluating a new target policy using offline data generated by a potentially different behavior policy. We propose a doubly-robust inference procedure for quantile OPE in sequential decision making. We demonstrate the advantages of this proposed estimator through both simulations and a real-world dataset from a short-video platform.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-29T22:01:43Z)
• Robust Design and Evaluation of Predictive Algorithms under Unobserved Confounding [6.925076885159747]
  We propose a framework for robust design and evaluation of predictive algorithms.<n>We show that varying confounding assumptions substantially affects credit risk predictions and fairness evaluations across income groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-19T20:41:44Z)
• Active Inference for Autonomous Decision-Making with Contextual Multi-Armed Bandits [1.3670071336891754]
  In autonomous robotic decision-making under uncertainty, the tradeoff between exploitation and exploration of available options must be considered. In this study, we apply active inference, which has been actively studied in the field of neuroscience in recent years, as an alternative action selection strategy for CMABs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-19T17:11:21Z)
• Bounding Counterfactuals under Selection Bias [60.55840896782637]
  We propose a first algorithm to address both identifiable and unidentifiable queries. We prove that, in spite of the missingness induced by the selection bias, the likelihood of the available data is unimodal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-26T10:33:10Z)
• Explainability's Gain is Optimality's Loss? -- How Explanations Bias Decision-making [0.0]
  Explanations help to facilitate communication between the algorithm and the human decision-maker. Feature-based explanations' semantics of causal models induce leakage from the decision-maker's prior beliefs. Such differences can lead to sub-optimal and biased decision outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-17T11:43:42Z)
• Counterfactual Predictions under Runtime Confounding [74.90756694584839]
  We study the counterfactual prediction task in the setting where all relevant factors are captured in the historical data. We propose a doubly-robust procedure for learning counterfactual prediction models in this setting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-30T15:49:05Z)

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.