Evidence
Same model and position · retrieved passages supplied · first output
In high-dimensional settings, one promising direction is to select covariates that predict the outcome rather than the treatment when constructing the propensity score model, an approach that has been formalized with rigorous guarantees and that avoids modeling the outcome regression altogether.
Passages supplied to the Evidence version
Card 1 · Outcome model free causal inference with ultra-high dimensional covariates
Causal inference has been increasingly reliant on observational studies with rich covariate information. To build tractable causal models, including the propensity score models, it is imperative to first extract important features from high dimensional data. Unlike the familiar task of variable sele…
Read full passage excerpt
Causal inference has been increasingly reliant on observational studies with rich covariate information. To build tractable causal models, including the propensity score models, it is imperative to first extract important features from high dimensional data. Unlike the familiar task of variable selection for prediction modeling, our feature selection procedure aims to control for confounding while maintaining efficiency in the resulting causal effect estimate. Previous empirical studies imply that one should aim to include all predictors of the outcome, rather than the treatment, in the propensity score model. In this paper, we formalize this intuition through rigorous proofs, and propose the causal ball screening for selecting these variables from modern ultra-high dimensional data sets. A distinctive feature of our proposal is that we do not require any modeling on the outcome regression, thus providing robustness against misspecification of the functional form or violation of smooth …
Card 2 · Causal Inference for Nonlinear Outcome Models with Possibly Invalid Instrumental Variables
Instrumental variable methods are widely used for inferring the causal effect in the presence of unmeasured confounders. Existing instrumental variable methods for nonlinear outcome models require stringent identifiability conditions. This paper considers a flexible semi-parametric potential outcome…
Read full passage excerpt
Instrumental variable methods are widely used for inferring the causal effect in the presence of unmeasured confounders. Existing instrumental variable methods for nonlinear outcome models require stringent identifiability conditions. This paper considers a flexible semi-parametric potential outcome model that allows for possibly invalid instruments. We propose new identifiability conditions to identify the causal parameters when the majority of the instrumental variables are valid. We devise a novel inference procedure for a new average structural function and the conditional average treatment effect. We establish the asymptotic normality of the proposed estimators and construct confidence intervals for the causal estimands by bootstrap. The proposed method is demonstrated in large-scale simulation studies and is applied to infer the effect of income on house ownership.
Card 3 · Posterior Predictive Propensity Scores and $p$-Values
\citet{Rosenbaum83ps} introduced the notion of the propensity score and discussed its central role in causal inference with observational studies. Their paper, however, caused a fundamental incoherence with an early paper by \citet{Rubin78}, which showed that the propensity score does not play any r…
Read full passage excerpt
\citet{Rosenbaum83ps} introduced the notion of the propensity score and discussed its central role in causal inference with observational studies. Their paper, however, caused a fundamental incoherence with an early paper by \citet{Rubin78}, which showed that the propensity score does not play any role in the Bayesian analysis of unconfounded observational studies if the priors on the propensity score and outcome models are independent. Despite the serious efforts made in the literature, it is generally difficult to reconcile these contradicting results. We offer a simple approach to incorporating the propensity score in Bayesian causal inference based on the posterior predictive $p$-value. To motivate a simple procedure, we focus on the model with the strong null hypothesis of no causal effects for any units whatsoever. Computationally, the proposed posterior predictive $p$-value equals the classic $p$-value based on the Fisher randomization test averaged over the posterior predictive …
Card 4 · A Bayesian Analysis of Two-Stage Randomized Experiments in the Presence of Interference, Treatment Nonadherence, and Missing Outcomes
Three critical issues for causal inference that often occur in modern, complicated experiments are interference, treatment nonadherence, and missing outcomes. A great deal of research efforts has been dedicated to developing causal inferential methodologies that address these issues separately. Howe…
Read full passage excerpt
Three critical issues for causal inference that often occur in modern, complicated experiments are interference, treatment nonadherence, and missing outcomes. A great deal of research efforts has been dedicated to developing causal inferential methodologies that address these issues separately. However, methodologies that can address these issues simultaneously are lacking. We propose a Bayesian causal inference methodology to address this gap. Our methodology extends existing causal frameworks and methods, specifically, two-staged randomized experiments and the principal stratification framework. In contrast to existing methods that invoke strong structural assumptions to identify principal causal effects, our Bayesian approach uses flexible distributional models that can accommodate the complexities of interference and missing outcomes, and that ensure that principal causal effects are weakly identifiable. We illustrate our methodology via simulation studies and a re-analysis of real …
Card 5 · Bayesian Estimation and Comparison of Conditional Moment Models
We consider the Bayesian analysis of models in which the unknown distribution of the outcomes is specified up to a set of conditional moment restrictions. The nonparametric exponentially tilted empirical likelihood function is constructed to satisfy a sequence of unconditional moments based on an in…
Read full passage excerpt
We consider the Bayesian analysis of models in which the unknown distribution of the outcomes is specified up to a set of conditional moment restrictions. The nonparametric exponentially tilted empirical likelihood function is constructed to satisfy a sequence of unconditional moments based on an increasing (in sample size) vector of approximating functions (such as tensor splines based on the splines of each conditioning variable). For any given sample size, results are robust to the number of expanded moments. We derive Bernstein-von Mises theorems for the behavior of the posterior distribution under both correct and incorrect specification of the conditional moments, subject to growth rate conditions (slower under misspecification) on the number of approximating functions. A large-sample theory for comparing different conditional moment models is also developed. The central result is that the marginal likelihood criterion selects the model that is less misspecified. We also introduc …
Model-reported card use
Card 1 · fact
Affected output: select covariates that predict the outcome rather than the treatment when constructing the propensity score model
Model explanation: This row supplied the specific variable-selection principle for the propensity score model in high dimensions, which the Draft had left as an open question.
Card 1 · fact
Affected output: an approach that has been formalized with rigorous guarantees and that avoids modeling the outcome regression altogether
Model explanation: This row supplied the facts that the intuition has been formalized through rigorous proofs and that the procedure requires no outcome regression modeling, which the generated sentence reports as properties of the cited approach.