Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Sample Observed Effects: Enumeration, Randomization and Generalization

Published 9 Aug 2021 in stat.ME and cs.AI | (2108.04376v6)

Abstract: The widely used 'Counterfactual' definition of Causal Effects was derived for unbiasedness and accuracy - and not generalizability. We propose a Combinatorial definition for the External Validity (EV) of intervention effects. We first define the concept of an effect observation 'background'. We then formulate conditions for effect generalization based on samples' sets of (observed and unobserved) backgrounds. This reveals two limits for effect generalization: (1) when effects of a variable are observed under all their enumerable backgrounds, or, (2) when backgrounds have become sufficiently randomized. We use the resulting combinatorial framework to re-examine several issues in the original counterfactual formulation: out-of-sample validity, concurrent estimation of multiple effects, bias-variance tradeoffs, statistical power, and connections to current predictive and explaining techniques. Methodologically, the definitions also allow us to replace the parametric estimation problems that followed the counterfactual definition by combinatorial enumeration and randomization problems in non-experimental samples. We use the resulting non-parametric framework to demonstrate (External Validity, Unconfoundness and Precision) tradeoffs in the performance of popular supervised, explaining, and causal-effect estimators. We also illustrate how the approach allows for the use of supervised and explaining methods in non-i.i.d. samples. The COVID19 pandemic highlighted the need for learning solutions to provide predictions in severally incomplete samples. We demonstrate applications in this pressing problem.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (66)
  1. Explaining individual predictions when features are dependent: More accurate approximations to shapley values. Artificial Intelligence, 298:103502, 2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2021.103502. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0004370221000539.
  2. A. Abadie. Using synthetic controls: Feasibility, data requirements, and methodological aspects. Journal of Economic Literature, 59(2):391–425, June 2021. doi: 10.1257/jel.20191450. URL https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jel.20191450.
  3. A. Abadie and G. W. Imbens. Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effects. Econometrica, 74(1):235–267, 2006. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00655.x.
  4. Statistical theory of overtraining: Is cross-validation asymptotically effective? In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS’95, pages 176–182, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1995. MIT Press.
  5. Explaining neural scaling laws, 2021.
  6. D. Bayer and P. Diaconis. Trailing the dovetail shuffle to its lair. The Annals of Applied Probability, 2(2):294–313, 1992.
  7. A. Bietti and J. Mairal. Group invariance, stability to deformations, and complexity of deep convolutional representations. J. Mach. Learn. Res., 20(1):876–924, jan 2019. ISSN 1532-4435.
  8. P. Buehlmann. Invariance, causality and robustness. Statistical science, 35(3):404–426, 2020. doi: 10.1214/19-STS721.
  9. N. Burkart and M. F. Huber. A survey on the explainability of supervised machine learning. J. Artif. Int. Res., 70:245–317, may 2021. ISSN 1076-9757. doi: 10.1613/jair.1.12228. URL https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.12228.
  10. The uk biobank resource with deep phenotyping and genomic data. Nature, 562(7726):203–209, 2018. doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0579-z. URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0579-z.
  11. Regression Discontinuity Designs Using Covariates. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 101(3):442–451, 07 2019. ISSN 0034-6535. doi: 10.1162/rest_a_00760. URL https://doi.org/10.1162/rest\_a\_00760.
  12. C. S. D. CDC-Dataset-2021. https://data.cdc.gov/case-surveillance/covid-19-case-surveillance-public-use-data-with-ge/n8mc-b4w4.
  13. G-computation, propensity score-based methods, and targeted maximum likelihood estimator for causal inference with different covariates sets: a comparative simulation study. Nature Scientific reports, 10(1):9219–9219, 2020. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-65917-x.
  14. Mathematical and computer modelling of the pareto principle. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 19(9):61–80, 1994. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-7177(94)90041-8. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0895717794900418.
  15. T. S. Cohen and M. Welling. Group equivariant convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on International Conference on Machine Learning - Volume 48, ICML’16, pages 2990–2999. JMLR.org, 2016.
  16. T. H. Cormen. Introduction to algorithms. MIT Press : McGraw-Hill, Cambridge, Mass.; Boston, 2001. ISBN 0262032937.
  17. J. Correa and E. Bareinboim. General transportability of soft interventions: Completeness results. In H. Larochelle, M. Ranzato, R. Hadsell, M. Balcan, and H. Lin, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 33, pages 10902–10912. Curran Associates, Inc., 2020. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2020/file/7b497aa1b2a83ec63d1777a88676b0c2-Paper.pdf.
  18. D. R. Cox. Randomization in the design of experiments. International Statistical Review, 77(3):415–429, 2024/03/03 2009. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-5823.2009.00084.x. URL https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-5823.2009.00084.x.
  19. Evaluation of individual and ensemble probabilistic forecasts of covid-19 mortality in the us, 2021.
  20. P. de Boer and J. F. D. Rodrigues. Decomposition analysis: when to use which method? Economic systems research, 32(1):1–28, 2020. doi: 10.1080/09535314.2019.1652571.
  21. P. Diaconis. The cutoff phenomenon in finite markov chains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 93(4):1659–1664, 2024/02/26 1996. doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.4.1659. URL https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.93.4.1659.
  22. P. Diaconis and J. Fulman. The Mathematics of Shuffling Cards. American Mathematical Society, 2023. ISBN 9781470463038. URL https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=dB2_EAAAQBAJ.
  23. The mathematics of perfect shuffles. Advances in Applied Mathematics, 4(2):175–196, 1983. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0196-8858(83)90009-X. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/019688588390009X.
  24. Associations Between Built Environment, Neighborhood Socioeconomic Status, and SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Pregnant Women in New York City. JAMA, 324(4):390–392, 07 2020. ISSN 0098-7484. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.11370. URL https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.11370.
  25. What can the millions of random treatments in nonexperimental data reveal about causes? Springer Nature Computer Science, 3(6):421, 2022. doi: 10.1007/s42979-022-01319-2. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-022-01319-2.
  26. Special invited paper. additive logistic regression: A statistical view of boosting. The Annals of statistics, 28(2):337–374, 2000.
  27. A solution to the generalized birthday problem with application to allozyme screening for cell culture contamination. 16(2):242–251, 1979. doi: DOI:10.2307/3212893. URL https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/047051AE3298E9001968C422A86A2022.
  28. Na\\\backslash\"ive regression requires weaker assumptions than factor models to adjust for multiple cause confounding. 2020.
  29. A. Gut. An Intermediate Course in Probability. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, 2nd edition, 2009. ISBN 1441901612.
  30. I. Guyon. A scaling law for the validation-set training-set size ratio. In AT and T Bell Laboratories, 1997.
  31. A simple generalisation of the area under the roc curve for multiple class classification problems. Machine Learning, 45(2):171–186, 2001. doi: 10.1023/A:1010920819831. URL https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010920819831.
  32. Matchings, derangements, rencontres. Mathematics Magazine, 56(4):224–229, 1983. doi: 10.2307/2689812.
  33. W. Hoeffding. A class of statistics with asymptotically normal distribution. The Annals of mathematical statistics, 19(3):293–325, 1948. doi: 10.1214/aoms/1177730196.
  34. Individual and community-level risk for covid-19 mortality in the united states. Nature Medicine, 27(2):264–269, 2021. doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-01191-8. URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-01191-8.
  35. M. Kearns. A bound on the error of cross validation using the approximation and estimation rates, with consequences for the training-test split. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS’95, pages 183–189, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1995. MIT Press.
  36. The parametric g-formula for time-to-event data: Intuition and a worked example. Epidemiology, 25(6), 2014. URL https://journals.lww.com/epidem/fulltext/2014/11000/the_parametric_g_formula_for_time_to_event_data_.16.aspx.
  37. O. Kempthorne and T. E. Doerfler. The behaviour of some significance tests under experimental randomization. Biometrika, 56(2):231–248, 08 1969. ISSN 0006-3444. doi: 10.1093/biomet/56.2.231. URL https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/56.2.231.
  38. D. E. Knuth. The art of computer programming, volume 2 (3rd ed.): seminumerical algorithms. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., USA, 1997. ISBN 0201896842.
  39. Efficient BackProp, pages 9–48. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg. ISBN 0302-9743. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-35289-8{\_}3.
  40. Individual-level fatality prediction of covid-19 patients using ai methods. Frontiers in Public Health, 8:566, 2020. ISSN 2296-2565. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.587937. URL https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpubh.2020.587937.
  41. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS’17, pages 4768–4777, Red Hook, NY, USA, 2017. Curran Associates Inc. ISBN 9781510860964.
  42. Consistent individualized feature attribution for tree ensembles, 2019.
  43. Domain adaptation by using causal inference to predict invariant conditional distributions. 2017.
  44. D. C. Montgomery. Design and analysis of experiments. John Wiley, New York, 2001. ISBN 0471316490; 9780471316497.
  45. S. L. Morgan and C. Winship. Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social Research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007. ISBN 0521671930; 9780521856157; 9780521671934; 0521856159. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511804564.
  46. T. S. Nunnikhoven. A birthday problem solution for nonuniform birth frequencies. The American Statistician, 46(4):270–274, 11 1992. doi: 10.1080/00031305.1992.10475901. URL https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00031305.1992.10475901.
  47. J. Pearl. Causality : models, reasoning, and inference. Cambridge, U.K. ; New York, 2000. ISBN 0521773628. Includes bibliographical references (p. 359-373) and indexes.; ID: http://id.lib.harvard.edu/aleph/008372583/catalog.
  48. J. Pearl and E. Bareinboim. Transportability of causal and statistical relations: A formal approach. In 2011 IEEE 11th International Conference on Data Mining Workshops, pages 540–547, 2011. doi: 10.1109/ICDMW.2011.169.
  49. J. Pearl and E. Bareinboim. External validity: From do-calculus to transportability across populations. Statistical Science, 29(4):579–595, 11 2014. doi: 10.1214/14-STS486. URL https://doi.org/10.1214/14-STS486.
  50. Causal inference by using invariant prediction: identification and confidence intervals. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B, Statistical methodology, 78(5):947–1012, 2016. doi: 10.1111/rssb.12167.
  51. Crowding and the shape of covid-19 epidemics. Nature Medicine, 26(12):1829–1834, 2020. doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-1104-0. URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-1104-0.
  52. A. Rényi. On the theory of order statistics. Acta Mathematica Academiae Scientiarum Hungarica, 4(3):191–231, 1953. doi: 10.1007/BF02127580. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02127580.
  53. A. F. Ribeiro. Spatiocausal patterns of sample growth, 2022a. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.13961.
  54. A. F. Ribeiro. Population structure and effect generalization, 2022b. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.13560.
  55. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1):41–55, 1983. doi: 10.1093/biomet/70.1.41.
  56. D. B. Rubin. Causal inference using potential outcomes: Design, modeling, decisions. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100(469):322–331, 2005. doi: 10.1198/016214504000001880.
  57. Toward causal representation learning. Proceedings of the IEEE, 109(5):612–634, 2021. doi: 10.1109/JPROC.2021.3058954.
  58. Estimating individual treatment effect: generalization bounds and algorithms. In D. Precup and Y. W. Teh, editors, Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 70 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 3076–3085. PMLR, 06–11 Aug 2017. URL http://proceedings.mlr.press/v70/shalit17a.html.
  59. I. M. Sobol. Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their monte carlo estimates. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 55(1):271–280, 2001. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4754(00)00270-6. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378475400002706.
  60. The elements of statistical learning : data mining, inference, and prediction. Springer, New York, 2001. ISBN 0387952845.
  61. U. B. D. UKB-Showcase-2021. https://biobank.ndph.ox.ac.uk/showcase/.
  62. M. van der Laan and S. Rose. Targeted Learning: Causal Inference for Observational and Experimental Data. Springer Series in Statistics. Springer New York, 2011. ISBN 9781441997821. URL https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=RGnSX5aCAgQC.
  63. Estimates of the severity of coronavirus disease 2019: a model-based analysis (vol 20, pg 669, 2020). The Lancet infectious diseases, 20(6):E116–E116, 2020. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30309-1.
  64. Y. Wang and D. M. Blei. The blessings of multiple causes. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 114(528):1574–1596, 2020. doi: 10.1080/01621459.2019.1686987.
  65. H. Yamato and Y. Maesono. Invariant u-statistics. Communications in statistics. Theory and methods, 15(11):3253–3263, 1986. doi: 10.1080/03610928608829307.
  66. Y. Zhang and Q. Zhao. What is a randomization test? Journal of the American Statistical Association, 118(544):2928–2942, 10 2023. doi: 10.1080/01621459.2023.2199814. URL https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2023.2199814.
Citations (4)

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Authors (1)

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 2 tweets with 0 likes about this paper.