Biases in observational data of treatments pose a major challenge to estimating expected treatment outcomes in different populations. An important technique that accounts for these biases is reweighting samples to minimize the discrepancy between treatment groups. We present a novel reweighting approach that uses bi-level optimization to alternately train a discriminator to minimize classification error, and a balancing weights generator that uses exponentiated gradient descent to maximize this error. This approach borrows principles from generative adversarial networks (GANs) to exploit the power of classifiers for measuring two-sample divergence. We provide theoretical results for conditions in which the estimation error is bounded by two factors: (i) the discrepancy measure induced by the discriminator; and (ii) the weights variability. Experimental results on several benchmarks comparing to previous state-of-the-art reweighting methods demonstrate the effectiveness of this approach in estimating causal effects.
In recent years, several methods addressed the sensitivity of IPW (e.g., @cite_16 @cite_30 @cite_19 @cite_21 @cite_3 @cite_7 @cite_33 ). Each of these methods provides alternative solutions to the following elementary problems: @math how to measure the bias between two distributions, and @math how to generate weights that minimize it. Some of the methods, (e.g., @cite_30 and @cite_19 ), fit propensity score models with imbalance constraints, to guarantee that even if the propensity model is misspecified, the covariates are still balanced. The other algorithms, including the one presented here, are designed to minimize a selected imbalance measure without considering the related propensity scores.
@cite_30 @cite_33 @cite_7 @cite_21 @cite_3 @cite_19 @cite_16
2116104019 2261710003 2620289825 2120817734 2256178860 2086102241
We propose a new inverse probability weighting (IPW) estimator for moment condition models with missing data. Our estimator is easy to implement and compares favorably with existing IPW estimators, including augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW) estimators, in terms of efficiency, robustness, and higher order bias. We illustrate our method with a study of the relationship between early Black-White differences in cognitive achievement and subsequent differences in adult earnings. In our dataset the early childhood achievement measure, the main regressor of interest, is missing for many units. In observational studies, propensity scores are commonly estimated by maxi- mum likelihood but may fail to balance high-dimensional pre-treatment covariates even after specification search. We introduce a general framework that unifies and generalizes several recent proposals to improve covariate balance when designing an observational study. In- stead of the likelihood function, we propose to optimize special loss functions---covariate balancing scoring rules (CBSR)---to estimate the propensity score. A CBSR is uniquely determined by the link function in the GLM and the estimand (a weighted average treatment effect). We show CBSR does not lose asymptotic efficiency to the Bernoulli likelihood in estimating the weighted average treatment effect compared, but CBSR is much more robust in finite sample. Borrowing tools developed in statistical learning, we propose practical strategies to balance covariate functions in rich function classes. This is useful to estimate the maximum bias of the inverse probability weighting (IPW) estimators and construct honest confidence interval in finite sample. Lastly, we provide several numerical examples to demonstrate the trade-off of bias and variance in the IPW-type estimators and the trade-off in balancing different function classes of the covariates. We present a new approach to the problems of evaluating and learning personalized decision policies from observational data of past contexts, decisions, and outcomes. Only the outcome of the enacted decision is available and the historical policy is unknown. These problems arise in personalized medicine using electronic health records and in internet advertising. Existing approaches use inverse propensity weighting (or, doubly robust versions) to make historical outcome (or, residual) data look like it were generated by a new policy being evaluated or learned. But this relies on a plug-in approach that rejects data points with a decision that disagrees with the new policy, leading to high variance estimates and ineffective learning. We propose a new, balance-based approach that too makes the data look like the new policy but does so directly by finding weights that optimize for balance between the weighted data and the target policy in the given, finite sample, which is equivalent to minimizing worst-case or posterior conditional mean square error. Our policy learner proceeds as a two-level optimization problem over policies and weights. We demonstrate that this approach markedly outperforms existing ones both in evaluation and learning, which is unsurprising given the wider support of balance-based weights. We establish extensive theoretical consistency guarantees and regret bounds that support this empirical success. Weighting methods that adjust for observed covariates, such as inverse probability weighting, are widely used for causal inference and estimation with incomplete outcome data. Part of the appeal of such methods is that one set of weights can be used to estimate a range of treatment effects based on different outcomes, or a variety of population means for several variables. However, this appeal can be diminished in practice by the instability of the estimated weights and by the difficulty of adequately adjusting for observed covariates in some settings. To address these limitations, this article presents a new weighting method that finds the weights of minimum variance that adjust or balance the empirical distribution of the observed covariates up to levels prespecified by the researcher. This method allows the researcher to balance very precisely the means of the observed covariates and other features of their marginal and joint distributions, such as variances and correlations and also, for example, the ... Increasingly complex generative models are being used across the disciplines as they allow for realistic characterization of data, but a common difficulty with them is the prohibitively large computational cost to perform likelihood-based statistical inference. We consider here a likelihood-free framework where inference is done by identifying parameter values which generate simulated data adequately resembling the observed data. A major difficulty is how to measure the discrepancy between the simulated and observed data. Transforming the original problem into a problem of classifying the data into simulated versus observed, we find that classification accuracy can be used to assess the discrepancy. The complete arsenal of classification methods becomes thereby available for inference of intractable generative models. This paper proposes entropy balancing, a data preprocessing method to achieve covariate balance in observational studies with binary treatments. Entropy balancing relies on a maximum entropy reweighting scheme that calibrates unit weights so that the reweighted treatment and control group satisfy a potentially large set of prespecified balance conditions that incorporate information about known sample moments. Entropy balancing thereby exactly adjusts inequalities in representation with respect to the first, second, and possibly higher moments of the covariate distributions. These balance improvements can reduce model dependence for the subsequent estimation of treatment effects. The method assures that balance improves on all covariate moments included in the reweighting. It also obviates the need for continual balance checking and iterative searching over propensity score models that may stochastically balance the covariate moments. We demonstrate the use of entropy balancing with Monte Carlo simulations and empirical applications.