用于 CATE 估算的 K 折因果 BART

Hugo Gobato Souto, Francisco Louzada Neto
{"title":"用于 CATE 估算的 K 折因果 BART","authors":"Hugo Gobato Souto, Francisco Louzada Neto","doi":"arxiv-2409.05665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research aims to propose and evaluate a novel model named K-Fold Causal\nBayesian Additive Regression Trees (K-Fold Causal BART) for improved estimation\nof Average Treatment Effects (ATE) and Conditional Average Treatment Effects\n(CATE). The study employs synthetic and semi-synthetic datasets, including the\nwidely recognized Infant Health and Development Program (IHDP) benchmark\ndataset, to validate the model's performance. Despite promising results in\nsynthetic scenarios, the IHDP dataset reveals that the proposed model is not\nstate-of-the-art for ATE and CATE estimation. Nonetheless, the research\nprovides several novel insights: 1. The ps-BART model is likely the preferred\nchoice for CATE and ATE estimation due to better generalization compared to the\nother benchmark models - including the Bayesian Causal Forest (BCF) model,\nwhich is considered by many the current best model for CATE estimation, 2. The\nBCF model's performance deteriorates significantly with increasing treatment\neffect heterogeneity, while the ps-BART model remains robust, 3. Models tend to\nbe overconfident in CATE uncertainty quantification when treatment effect\nheterogeneity is low, 4. A second K-Fold method is unnecessary for avoiding\noverfitting in CATE estimation, as it adds computational costs without\nimproving performance, 5. Detailed analysis reveals the importance of\nunderstanding dataset characteristics and using nuanced evaluation methods, 6.\nThe conclusion of Curth et al. (2021) that indirect strategies for CATE\nestimation are superior for the IHDP dataset is contradicted by the results of\nthis research. These findings challenge existing assumptions and suggest\ndirections for future research to enhance causal inference methodologies.","PeriodicalId":501340,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - STAT - Machine Learning","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"K-Fold Causal BART for CATE Estimation\",\"authors\":\"Hugo Gobato Souto, Francisco Louzada Neto\",\"doi\":\"arxiv-2409.05665\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This research aims to propose and evaluate a novel model named K-Fold Causal\\nBayesian Additive Regression Trees (K-Fold Causal BART) for improved estimation\\nof Average Treatment Effects (ATE) and Conditional Average Treatment Effects\\n(CATE). The study employs synthetic and semi-synthetic datasets, including the\\nwidely recognized Infant Health and Development Program (IHDP) benchmark\\ndataset, to validate the model's performance. Despite promising results in\\nsynthetic scenarios, the IHDP dataset reveals that the proposed model is not\\nstate-of-the-art for ATE and CATE estimation. Nonetheless, the research\\nprovides several novel insights: 1. The ps-BART model is likely the preferred\\nchoice for CATE and ATE estimation due to better generalization compared to the\\nother benchmark models - including the Bayesian Causal Forest (BCF) model,\\nwhich is considered by many the current best model for CATE estimation, 2. The\\nBCF model's performance deteriorates significantly with increasing treatment\\neffect heterogeneity, while the ps-BART model remains robust, 3. Models tend to\\nbe overconfident in CATE uncertainty quantification when treatment effect\\nheterogeneity is low, 4. A second K-Fold method is unnecessary for avoiding\\noverfitting in CATE estimation, as it adds computational costs without\\nimproving performance, 5. Detailed analysis reveals the importance of\\nunderstanding dataset characteristics and using nuanced evaluation methods, 6.\\nThe conclusion of Curth et al. (2021) that indirect strategies for CATE\\nestimation are superior for the IHDP dataset is contradicted by the results of\\nthis research. These findings challenge existing assumptions and suggest\\ndirections for future research to enhance causal inference methodologies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501340,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv - STAT - Machine Learning\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"arXiv - STAT - Machine Learning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.05665\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - STAT - Machine Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.05665","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在提出并评估一种名为 K 倍因果贝叶斯加性回归树(K-Fold Causal BART)的新型模型,以改进平均治疗效果(ATE)和条件平均治疗效果(CATE)的估计。研究采用了合成和半合成数据集,包括广受认可的婴儿健康与发展计划(IHDP)基准数据集,以验证模型的性能。尽管在合成场景中取得了很好的结果,但 IHDP 数据集显示,所提出的模型在 ATE 和 CATE 估算方面并不先进。尽管如此,这项研究还是提出了一些新见解:1.与其他基准模型(包括贝叶斯因果森林(BCF)模型)相比,ps-BART 模型具有更好的泛化能力,因此很可能是 CATE 和 ATE 估计的首选模型,而后者被许多人认为是当前 CATE 估计的最佳模型;2. 随着治疗效果异质性的增加,BCF 模型的性能显著下降,而 ps-BART 模型则保持稳健;3. 当治疗效果异质性较低时,模型在 CATE 不确定性量化方面往往过于自信;4.5.详细分析揭示了了解数据集特征和使用细致入微的评估方法的重要性,6.Curth 等人(2021 年)关于 CATE 估算的间接策略对于 IHDP 数据集更优越的结论与本研究结果相矛盾。这些发现对现有假设提出了挑战,并为未来研究提出了方向,以加强因果推理方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
K-Fold Causal BART for CATE Estimation
This research aims to propose and evaluate a novel model named K-Fold Causal Bayesian Additive Regression Trees (K-Fold Causal BART) for improved estimation of Average Treatment Effects (ATE) and Conditional Average Treatment Effects (CATE). The study employs synthetic and semi-synthetic datasets, including the widely recognized Infant Health and Development Program (IHDP) benchmark dataset, to validate the model's performance. Despite promising results in synthetic scenarios, the IHDP dataset reveals that the proposed model is not state-of-the-art for ATE and CATE estimation. Nonetheless, the research provides several novel insights: 1. The ps-BART model is likely the preferred choice for CATE and ATE estimation due to better generalization compared to the other benchmark models - including the Bayesian Causal Forest (BCF) model, which is considered by many the current best model for CATE estimation, 2. The BCF model's performance deteriorates significantly with increasing treatment effect heterogeneity, while the ps-BART model remains robust, 3. Models tend to be overconfident in CATE uncertainty quantification when treatment effect heterogeneity is low, 4. A second K-Fold method is unnecessary for avoiding overfitting in CATE estimation, as it adds computational costs without improving performance, 5. Detailed analysis reveals the importance of understanding dataset characteristics and using nuanced evaluation methods, 6. The conclusion of Curth et al. (2021) that indirect strategies for CATE estimation are superior for the IHDP dataset is contradicted by the results of this research. These findings challenge existing assumptions and suggest directions for future research to enhance causal inference methodologies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Fitting Multilevel Factor Models Cartan moving frames and the data manifolds Symmetry-Based Structured Matrices for Efficient Approximately Equivariant Networks Recurrent Interpolants for Probabilistic Time Series Prediction PieClam: A Universal Graph Autoencoder Based on Overlapping Inclusive and Exclusive Communities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1