Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Asymptotically Unbiased Synthetic Control Methods by Density Matching

Published 20 Jul 2023 in econ.EM, cs.LG, and stat.ME | (2307.11127v4)

Abstract: Synthetic Control Methods (SCMs) have become a fundamental tool for comparative case studies. The core idea behind SCMs is to estimate treatment effects by predicting counterfactual outcomes for a treated unit using a weighted combination of observed outcomes from untreated units. The accuracy of these predictions is crucial for evaluating the treatment effect of a policy intervention. Subsequent research has therefore focused on estimating SC weights. In this study, we highlight a key endogeneity issue in existing SCMs-namely, the correlation between the outcomes of untreated units and the error term of the synthetic control, which leads to bias in both counterfactual outcome prediction and treatment effect estimation. To address this issue, we propose a novel SCM based on density matching, assuming that the outcome density of the treated unit can be approximated by a weighted mixture of the joint density of untreated units. Under this assumption, we estimate SC weights by matching the moments of the treated outcomes with the weighted sum of the moments of the untreated outcomes. Our method offers three advantages: first, under the mixture model assumption, our estimator is asymptotically unbiased; second, this asymptotic unbiasedness reduces the mean squared error in counterfactual predictions; and third, our method provides full densities of the treatment effect rather than just expected values, thereby broadening the applicability of SCMs. Finally, we present experimental results that demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (37)
  1. Abadie, Alberto (2002), “Bootstrap tests for distributional treatment effects in instrumental variable models.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 97 (457), 284–292.
  2. Abadie, Alberto (2021), “Using synthetic controls: Feasibility, data requirements, and methodological aspects.” Journal of Economic Literature, 59 (2), 391–425.
  3. Abadie, Alberto, Alexis Diamond, and Jens Hainmueller (2010), “Synthetic control methods for comparative case studies: Estimating the effect of california’s tobacco control program.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 105 (490), 493–505.
  4. Abadie, Alberto, Alexis Diamond, and Jens Hainmueller (2015), “Comparative politics and the synthetic control method.” American Journal of Political Science, 59 (2), 495–510.
  5. Abadie, Alberto and Javier Gardeazabal (2003), “The economic costs of conflict: A case study of the basque country.” American Economic Review, 93 (1), 113–132.
  6. Athey, Susan and Guido W. Imbens (2006), “Identification and inference in nonlinear difference-in-differences models.” Econometrica, 74 (2), 431–497.
  7. Athey, Susan and Guido W. Imbens (2017), “The state of applied econometrics: Causality and policy evaluation.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31 (2), 3–32.
  8. Ben-Michael, Eli, Avi Feller, and Jesse Rothstein (2019), “Synthetic controls with staggered adoption.”
  9. Ben-Michael, Eli, Avi Feller, and Jesse Rothstein (2021), “The augmented synthetic control method.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 116 (536), 1789–1803.
  10. Card, David and Alan B. Krueger (2000), “Minimum wages and employment: A case study of the fast-food industry in new jersey and pennsylvania: Reply.” American Economic Review, 90 (5), 1397–1420.
  11. Cattaneo, Matias D., Yingjie Feng, and Rocio Titiunik (2021), “Prediction intervals for synthetic control methods.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 116 (536), 1865–1880.
  12. Chen, Yi-Ting (2020), “A distributional synthetic control method for policy evaluation.” Journal of Applied Econometrics, 35 (5), 505–525.
  13. Chernozhukov, Victor, Kaspar Wüthrich, and Yinchu Zhu (2019), “Inference on average treatment effects in aggregate panel data settings.” Technical report, institute for fiscal studies.
  14. Chernozhukov, Victor, Kaspar Wüthrich, and Yinchu Zhu (2021), “An exact and robust conformal inference method for counterfactual and synthetic controls.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 116 (536), 1849–1864.
  15. Chikahara, Yoichi, Makoto Yamada, and Hisashi Kashima (2022), “Feature selection for discovering distributional treatment effect modifiers.” In UAI.
  16. Cunningham, Scott and Manisha Shah (2017), “Decriminalizing Indoor Prostitution: Implications for Sexual Violence and Public Health.” The Review of Economic Studies, 85 (3), 1683–1715.
  17. Dijcke, David Van (2024), “Empirical application in gunsilius (2023).” URL https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/DiSCos/vignettes/Dube2019.html.
  18. Doudchenko, Nikolay and Guido W Imbens (2016), “Balancing, regression, difference-in-differences and synthetic control methods: A synthesis.” Working Paper 22791, National Bureau of Economic Research.
  19. Ferman, Bruno (2021), “On the properties of the synthetic control estimator with many periods and many controls.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 116 (536), 1764–1772.
  20. Ferman, Bruno and Cristine Pinto (2021), “Synthetic controls with imperfect pretreatment fit.” Quantitative Economics, 12 (4), 1197–1221.
  21. Fry, Joseph (2024), “A method of moments approach to asymptotically unbiased synthetic controls.” arXiv:2312.01209.
  22. Gastwirth, Joseph L. (1971), “A general definition of the lorenz curve.” Econometrica, 39 (6), 1037–1039.
  23. Gretton, Arthur, Karsten M. Borgwardt, Malte J. Rasch, Bernhard Schölkopf, and Alexander Smola (2012), “A kernel two-sample test.” Journal of Machine Learning Research, 13 (25), 723–773.
  24. Gunsilius, F. F. (2023), “Distributional synthetic controls.” Econometrica, 91 (3), 1105–1117.
  25. Kallus, Nathan and Miruna Oprescu (2022), “Robust and agnostic learning of conditional distributional treatment effects.” arXiv:2205.11486.
  26. Li, Kathleen T. (2020), “Statistical inference for average treatment effects estimated by synthetic control methods.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 115 (532), 2068–2083.
  27. Maier, Michael (2011), “Tests for distributional treatment effects under unconfoundedness.” Economics Letters, 110 (1), 49–51.
  28. Nazaret, Achille, Claudia Shi, and David M. Blei (2023), “On the misspecification of linear assumptions in synthetic control.”
  29. Neumark, David and William Wascher (2000), “Minimum wages and employment: A case study of the fast-food industry in new jersey and pennsylvania: Comment.” American Economic Review, 90 (5), 1362–1396.
  30. Neyman, Jerzy (1923), “Sur les applications de la theorie des probabilites aux experiences agricoles: Essai des principes.” Statistical Science, 5, 463–472.
  31. Park, Junhyung, Uri Shalit, Bernhard Schölkopf, and Krikamol Muandet (2021), “Conditional distributional treatment effect with kernel conditional mean embeddings and u-statistic regression.” In ICML, 8401–8412.
  32. Ropponen, Olli (2011), “Reconciling the evidence of card and krueger (1994) and neumark and wascher (2000).” Journal of Applied Econometrics, 26 (6), 1051–1057.
  33. Rubin, Donald B. (1974), “Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies.” Journal of Educational Psychology.
  34. Shaikh, Azeem M. and Panos Toulis (2021), “Randomization tests in observational studies with staggered adoption of treatment.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 116 (536), 1835–1848.
  35. Shi, Claudia, Dhanya Sridhar, Vishal Misra, and David Blei (2022), “On the assumptions of synthetic control methods.” In AISTATS, 7163–7175.
  36. Spiess, Jann, Guido Imbens, and Amar Venugopal (2023), “Double and single descent in causal inference with an application to high-dimensional synthetic control.”
  37. Wan, Shui-Ki, Yimeng Xie, and Cheng Hsiao (2018), “Panel data approach vs synthetic control method.” Economics Letters, 164, 121–123.
Citations (1)

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 (2)

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 11 likes about this paper.