Author(s): Bradic, Jelena; Wager, Stefan; Zhu, Yinchu | Abstract: Many popular methods for building confidence intervals on causal effects under high-dimensional confounding require strong "ultra-sparsity" assumptions that may be difficult to validate in practice. To alleviate this difficulty, we here study a new method for average treatment effect estimation that yields asymptotically exact confidence intervals assuming that either the conditional response surface or the conditional probability of treatment allows for an ultra-sparse representation (but not necessarily both). This guarantee allows us to provide valid inference for average treatment effect in high dimensions under considerably more generality than available baselines. In addition, we showcase that our results are semi-parametrically efficient.
We also note two recent papers that consider estimators that resemble ours. consider an estimator that, in the spirit of , first fit a penalized covariate-balancing propensity model, and then re-fit without penalty those coefficients that correspond to features that are relevant to outcome modeling. Meanwhile, augments a penalized covariate-balancing propensity model in an outcome regression; it turns out that his covariate-balancing mechanism designed to address the issue of misspecification is also helpful for relaxing sparsity requirements. Neither paper, however, achieves sparsity double robustness as discussed here; rather, they require both the outcome parameter vector @math and the propensity parameter vector @math to be ultra-sparse---or, if there is misspecification they require the population minimizers of both the outcome and propensity loss functions to be ultra-sparse. Under the framework of @cite_4 @cite_2 , are classified as examples of model double robustness, which means that one of the models (either conditional mean or propensity score) is misspecified. Rate double robustness requires that the product of the @math -norms of the estimation errors in two models is of the order @math .
@cite_4 @cite_2
2765948077 2786512041 2803204576 1664169458
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. Consider the problem of estimating average treatment effects when a large number of covariates are used to adjust for possible confounding through outcome regression and propensity score models. The conventional approach of model building and fitting iteratively can be difficult to implement, depending on ad hoc choices of what variables are included. In addition, uncertainty from the iterative process of model selection is complicated and often ignored in subsequent inference about treatment effects. We develop new methods and theory to obtain not only doubly robust point estimators for average treatment effects, which remain consistent if either the propensity score model or the outcome regression model is correctly specified, but also model-assisted confidence intervals, which are valid when the propensity score model is correctly specified but the outcome regression model may be misspecified. With a linear outcome model, the confidence intervals are doubly robust, that is, being also valid when the outcome model is correctly specified but the propensity score model may be misspecified. Our methods involve regularized calibrated estimators with Lasso penalties, but carefully chosen loss functions, for fitting propensity score and outcome regression models. We provide high-dimensional analysis to establish the desired properties of our methods under comparable conditions to previous results, which give valid confidence intervals when both the propensity score and outcome regression are correctly specified. We present a simulation study and an empirical application which confirm the advantages of the proposed methods compared with related methods based on regularized maximum likelihood estimation. Two important elements have driven recent innovation in the field of regression: sparsity-inducing regularization, to cope with high-dimensional problems; multi-task learning through joint parameter estimation, to augment the number of training samples. Both approaches complement each other in the sense that a joint estimation results in more samples, which are needed to estimate sparse models accurately, whereas sparsity promotes models that act on subsets of related variables. This idea has driven the proposal of block regularizers such as L1 Lq norms, which however effective, require that active regressors strictly overlap. In this paper, we propose a more flexible convex regularizer based on unbalanced optimal transport (OT) theory. That regularizer promotes parameters that are close, according to the OT geometry, which takes into account a prior geometric knowledge on the regressor variables. We derive an efficient algorithm based on a regularized formulation of optimal transport, which iterates through applications of Sinkhorn's algorithm along with coordinate descent iterations. The performance of our model is demonstrated on regular grids and complex triangulated geometries of the cortex with an application in neuroimaging. We consider high dimensional sparse regression, and develop strategies able to deal with arbitrary -- possibly, severe or coordinated -- errors in the covariance matrix @math . These may come from corrupted data, persistent experimental errors, or malicious respondents in surveys recommender systems, etc. Such non-stochastic error-in-variables problems are notoriously difficult to treat, and as we demonstrate, the problem is particularly pronounced in high-dimensional settings where the primary goal is support recovery of the sparse regressor. We develop algorithms for support recovery in sparse regression, when some number @math out of @math total covariate response pairs are arbitrarily (possibly maliciously) corrupted . We are interested in understanding how many outliers, @math , we can tolerate, while identifying the correct support. To the best of our knowledge, neither standard outlier rejection techniques, nor recently developed robust regression algorithms (that focus only on corrupted response variables), nor recent algorithms for dealing with stochastic noise or erasures, can provide guarantees on support recovery. Perhaps surprisingly, we also show that the natural brute force algorithm that searches over all subsets of @math covariate response pairs, and all subsets of possible support coordinates in order to minimize regression error, is remarkably poor, unable to correctly identify the support with even @math corrupted points, where @math is the sparsity. This is true even in the basic setting we consider, where all authentic measurements and noise are independent and sub-Gaussian. In this setting, we provide a simple algorithm -- no more computationally taxing than OMP -- that gives stronger performance guarantees, recovering the support with up to @math corrupted points, where @math is the dimension of the signal to be recovered.