In this paper, we propose a robust method to estimate the average treatment effects in observational studies when the number of potential confounders is possibly much greater than the sample size. We first use a class of penalized M-estimators for the propensity score and outcome models. We then calibrate the initial estimate of the propensity score by balancing a carefully selected subset of covariates that are predictive of the outcome. Finally, the estimated propensity score is used to construct the inverse probability weighting estimator. We prove that the proposed estimator, which has the sample boundedness property, is root-n consistent, asymptotically normal, and semiparametrically efficient when the propensity score model is correctly specified and the outcome model is linear in covariates. More importantly, we show that our estimator remains root-n consistent and asymptotically normal so long as either the propensity score model or the outcome model is correctly specified. We provide valid confidence intervals in both cases and further extend these results to the case where the outcome model is a generalized linear model. In simulation studies, we find that the proposed methodology often estimates the average treatment effect more accurately than the existing methods. We also present an empirical application, in which we estimate the average causal effect of college attendance on adulthood political participation. Open-source software is available for implementing the proposed methodology.
Most recently, @cite_33 @cite_14 proposed a penalized calibrated propensity score method and studied its robustness to model misspecification. Our work is closely related to @cite_33 , which can be seen as equivalent to directly plugging the initial estimator @math into the Horvitz-Thompson estimator with @math . However, this method does not balance the covariates as we did in Step 3. Corollary 3 of @cite_33 implies that the estimator has the rate of the convergence @math , which is slower than that of our estimator. In our proof, one can treat @math as the bias" of the Horvitz-Thompson estimator, which is eliminated by the covariate balancing step, whereas this term remains in @cite_33 . In the followup paper, @cite_14 removed this bias by constructing an AIPW estimator so that the resulting estimator is robust to model misspecification. However, our result is more general than that of @cite_14 . First, our Theorem , and Propositions and show that there exists a large class of estimators that is asymptotically normal under possible model misspecification. Second, our theory holds for generalized linear models as shown in Theorem , whereas @cite_14 's method is invalid if the propensity score model is misspecified.
@cite_14 @cite_33
2765948077 2000931246 1999822211 2962726112
Propensity score methods are widely used for estimating treatment effects from observational studies. A popular approach is to estimate propensity scores by maximum likelihood based on logistic regression, and then apply inverse probability weighted estimators or extensions to estimate treatment effects. However, a challenging issue is that such inverse probability weighting methods including doubly robust methods can perform poorly even when the logistic model appears adequate as examined by conventional techniques. In addition, there is increasing difficulty to appropriately estimate propensity scores when dealing with a large number of covariates. To address these issues, we study calibrated estimation as an alternative to maximum likelihood estimation for fitting logistic propensity score models. We show that, with possible model misspecification, minimizing the expected calibration loss underlying the calibrated estimators involves reducing both the expected likelihood loss and a measure of relative errors which controls the mean squared errors of inverse probability weighted estimators. Furthermore, we propose a regularized calibrated estimator by minimizing the calibration loss with a Lasso penalty. We develop a novel Fisher scoring descent algorithm for computing the proposed estimator, and provide a high-dimensional analysis of the resulting inverse probability weighted estimators of population means, leveraging the control of relative errors for calibrated estimation. We present a simulation study and an empirical application to demonstrate the advantages of the proposed methods compared with maximum likelihood and regularization. Let f be a random Boolean formula that is an instance of 3-SAT. We consider the problem of computing the least real number k such that if the ratio of the number of clauses over the number of variables of f strictly exceeds k , then f is almost certainly unsatisfiable. By a well-known and more or less straightforward argument, it can be shown that kF5.191. This upper bound was improved by to 4.758 by first providing new improved bounds for the occupancy problem. There is strong experimental evidence that the value of k is around 4.2. In this work, we define, in terms of the random formula f, a decreasing sequence of random variables such that, if the expected value of any one of them converges to zero, then f is almost certainly unsatisfiable. By letting the expected value of the first term of the sequence converge to zero, we obtain, by simple and elementary computations, an upper bound for k equal to 4.667. From the expected value of the second term of the sequence, we get the value 4.601q . In general, by letting the U This work was performed while the first author was visiting the School of Computer Science, Carleton Ž University, and was partially supported by NSERC Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council . of Canada , and by a grant from the University of Patras for sabbatical leaves. The second and third Ž authors were supported in part by grants from NSERC Natural Sciences and Engineering Research . Council of Canada . During the last stages of this research, the first and last authors were also partially Ž . supported by EU ESPRIT Long-Term Research Project ALCOM-IT Project No. 20244 . †An extended abstract of this paper was published in the Proceedings of the Fourth Annual European Ž Symposium on Algorithms, ESA’96, September 25]27, 1996, Barcelona, Spain Springer-Verlag, LNCS, . pp. 27]38 . That extended abstract was coauthored by the first three authors of the present paper. Correspondence to: L. M. Kirousis Q 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 1042-9832r98r030253-17 253 Machine learning techniques such as classification and regression trees (CART) have been suggested as promising alternatives to logistic regression for the estimation of propensity scores. The authors examined the performance of various CART-based propensity score models using simulated data. Hypothetical studies of varying sample sizes (n=500, 1000, 2000) with a binary exposure, continuous outcome, and ten covariates were simulated under seven scenarios differing by degree of non-linear and non-additive associations between covariates and the exposure. Propensity score weights were estimated using logistic regression (all main effects), CART, pruned CART, and the ensemble methods of bagged CART, random forests, and boosted CART. Performance metrics included covariate balance, standard error, percent absolute bias, and 95 confidence interval coverage. All methods displayed generally acceptable performance under conditions of either non-linearity or non-additivity alone. However, under conditions of both moderate non-additivity and moderate non-linearity, logistic regression had subpar performance, while ensemble methods provided substantially better bias reduction and more consistent 95 CI coverage. The results suggest that ensemble methods, especially boosted CART, may be useful for propensity score weighting. We consider the problem of fitting the parameters of a high-dimensional linear regression model. In the regime where the number of parameters p is comparable to or exceeds the sample size n, a successful approach uses an l1-penalized least squares estimator, known as Lasso. Unfortunately, unlike for linear estimators (e.g. ordinary least squares), no well-established method exists to compute confidence intervals or p-values on the basis of the Lasso estimator. Very recently, a line of work [8], [7], [13] has addressed this problem by constructing a debiased version of the Lasso estimator. We propose a special debiasing method that is well suited for random designs with sparse inverse covariance. Our approach improves over the state of the art in that it yields nearly optimal average testing power if sample size n asymptotically dominates s0(logp)2, with s0 being the sparsity level (number of non-zero coefficients). Earlier work achieved similar performances only for much larger sample size, namely it requires n to asymptotically dominates (s0 log p)2. We evaluate our method on synthetic data, and compare it with earlier proposals.