Chance-constrained selection of sequential intervention strategies from counterfactual estimates
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.13209v1
- Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 13:12:05 GMT
- Title: Chance-constrained selection of sequential intervention strategies from counterfactual estimates
- Abstract summary: We present a predict-then-optimize framework for cost-based decisions.<n>In the prediction step, any estimator returning an outcome value and a cost distribution supplies what the decision rule consumes.<n>In the optimization step, a chance-constrained selection over a finite candidate set the bounds that the cumulative cost exceeds the budget.
- Score: 7.461214229363999
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Many operational decisions are sequences of interventions under a cumulative resource limit, such as a maintenance schedule within a crew-hour budget. Choosing among them calls for the outcome and the cumulative cost each would produce, counterfactual quantities identified from observational data. Two strategies with the same expected cost can exceed the budget at very different rates, so constraining the mean does not bound how often an overrun occurs. Prior two-step architectures, recently extended to continuous doses, constrain the mean cost rather than its tail and allocate at a single decision point. Methods that do bound a cost tail take its distribution from a specified model rather than identifying it from data. We present a predict-then-optimize framework. In the prediction step, any estimator returning an outcome value and a cost distribution supplies what the decision rule consumes, so the predictor is interchangeable. In the optimization step, a chance-constrained selection over a finite candidate set bounds the probability that the cumulative cost exceeds the budget. That tail does not decompose across stages, so each strategy is scored whole. Sweeping the tolerated violation probability traces a safety-utility frontier, and distribution-free finite-sample bounds cover violation and outcome shortfall. Four of five environments, spanning clinical treatment and equipment maintenance, supply exact counterfactual ground truth; the fifth carries real outcomes from a digital-health micro-randomized trial. Across them, the rule holds the budget where a point-estimate rule overruns it, at an outcome cost the frontier makes explicit. All code is available at https://github.com/mfriendly/counterfactual-chance-selection
Related papers
- Differentiating Through Dual Prices: End-to-End Policy Learning Under Capacity Constraints [0.0]
We study how to learn such an assignment policy from logged observational data.<n>Standard pipeline is decision-blind: fit one outcome model per arm by regression.<n>We instead train outcome models end-to-end, differentiating an off-policy estimate through the dual prices.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-05T10:28:21Z) - Active Multiple-Prediction-Powered Inference [2.1710524042938073]
Post-deployment monitoring of healthcare requires statistically valid, label-efficient methods, but gold-standard labels from clinician chart review are expensive.<n>We propose Prediction Active-Prediction-Powered Inference (AM-PPI), which routes each instance to a cost-appropriate predictor, samples gold-standard labels in proportion, and repredicts predictions to a single deployment-time.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-08T19:48:57Z) - Beyond Uncertainty Sets: Leveraging Optimal Transport to Extend Conformal Predictive Distribution to Multivariate Settings [0.14504054468850666]
Conformal prediction (CP) constructs uncertainty sets for model outputs with finite-sample coverage guarantees.<n>We show that optimal assignment is piecewise-constant across a fixed polyhedral partition of the score space.<n>This allows us to characterize the entire prediction set tractably, and provides the machinery to address a deeper limitation of prediction sets.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-11-19T05:59:01Z) - Monitoring State Transitions in Markovian Systems with Sampling Cost [65.4151496405543]
A natural approach is a greedy policy that predicts when the expected prediction loss is below the query cost and queries otherwise.<n>We analyze this policy in a Markovian setting, where the optimal (OPT) strategy is a state-dependent threshold policy.<n>For the case of unknown transition probabilities, we propose a projected gradient descent (PSGD)-based learning variant of the greedy policy.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-25T15:07:37Z) - 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) - No-Regret Learning Under Adversarial Resource Constraints: A Spending Plan Is All You Need! [56.80767500991973]
We focus on two canonical settings: $(i)$ online resource allocation where rewards and costs are observed before action selection, and $(ii)$ online learning with resource constraints where they are observed after action selection, under full feedback or bandit feedback.<n>It is well known that achieving sublinear regret in these settings is impossible when reward and cost distributions may change arbitrarily over time.<n>We design general (primal-)dual methods that achieve sublinear regret with respect to baselines that follow the spending plan. Crucially, the performance of our algorithms improves when the spending plan ensures a well-balanced distribution of the budget
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-16T08:42:31Z) - Regression-Based Estimation of Causal Effects in the Presence of Selection Bias and Confounding [52.1068936424622]
We consider the problem of estimating the expected causal effect $E[Y|do(X)]$ for a target variable $Y$ when treatment $X$ is set by intervention.<n>In settings without selection bias or confounding, $E[Y|do(X)] = E[Y|X]$, which can be estimated using standard regression methods.<n>We propose a framework that incorporates both selection bias and confounding.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-26T13:43:37Z) - Decision from Suboptimal Classifiers: Excess Risk Pre- and Post-Calibration [52.70324949884702]
We quantify the excess risk incurred using approximate posterior probabilities in batch binary decision-making.<n>We identify regimes where recalibration alone addresses most of the regret, and regimes where the regret is dominated by the grouping loss.<n>On NLP experiments, we show that these quantities identify when the expected gain of more advanced post-training is worth the operational cost.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-23T10:52:36Z) - Counterfactual inference in sequential experiments [17.817769460838665]
We consider after-study statistical inference for sequentially designed experiments wherein multiple units are assigned treatments for multiple time points.<n>Our goal is to provide inference guarantees for the counterfactual mean at the smallest possible scale.<n>We illustrate our theory via several simulations and a case study involving data from a mobile health clinical trial HeartSteps.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-02-14T17:24:27Z) - Universal Off-Policy Evaluation [64.02853483874334]
We take the first steps towards a universal off-policy estimator (UnO)
We use UnO for estimating and simultaneously bounding the mean, variance, quantiles/median, inter-quantile range, CVaR, and the entire cumulative distribution of returns.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-04-26T18:54:31Z)
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.