Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userDeep Proxy Causal Learning and its Application to Confounded Bandit Policy Evaluation
92
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Proxy causal learning (PCL) is a method for estimating the causal effect of treatments on outcomes in the presence of unobserved confounding, using proxies (structured side information) for the confounder. This is achieved via two-stage regression: in the first stage, we model relations among the treatment and proxies; in the second stage, we use this model to learn the effect of treatment on the outcome, given the context provided by the proxies. PCL guarantees recovery of the true causal effect, subject to identifiability conditions. We propose a novel method for PCL, the deep feature proxy variable method (DFPV), to address the case where the proxies, treatments, and outcomes are high-dimensional and have nonlinear complex relationships, as represented by deep neural network features. We show that DFPV outperforms recent state-of-the-art PCL methods on challenging synthetic benchmarks, including settings involving high dimensional image data. Furthermore, we show that PCL can be applied to off-policy evaluation for the confounded bandit problem, in which DFPV also exhibits competitive performance.
rate research
Read More
Off-policy evaluation (OPE) holds the promise of being able to leverage large, offline datasets for both evaluating and selecting complex policies for decision making. The ability to learn offline is particularly important in many real-world domains, such as in healthcare, recommender systems, or robotics, where online data collection is an expensive and potentially dangerous process. Being able to accurately evaluate and select high-performing policies without requiring online interaction could yield significant benefits in safety, time, and cost for these applications. While many OPE methods have been proposed in recent years, comparing results between papers is difficult because currently there is a lack of a comprehensive and unified benchmark, and measuring algorithmic progress has been challenging due to the lack of difficult evaluation tasks. In order to address this gap, we present a collection of policies that in conjunction with existing offline datasets can be used for benchmarking off-policy evaluation. Our tasks include a range of challenging high-dimensional continuous control problems, with wide selections of datasets and policies for performing policy selection. The goal of our benchmark is to provide a standardized measure of progress that is motivated from a set of principles designed to challenge and test the limits of existing OPE methods. We perform an evaluation of state-of-the-art algorithms and provide open-source access to our data and code to foster future research in this area.
Machine learning models have had discernible achievements in a myriad of applications. However, most of these models are black-boxes, and it is obscure how the decisions are made by them. This makes the models unreliable and untrustworthy. To provide insights into the decision making processes of these models, a variety of traditional interpretable models have been proposed. Moreover, to generate more human-friendly explanations, recent work on interpretability tries to answer questions related to causality such as Why does this model makes such decisions? or Was it a specific feature that caused the decision made by the model?. In this work, models that aim to answer causal questions are referred to as causal interpretable models. The existing surveys have covered concepts and methodologies of traditional interpretability. In this work, we present a comprehensive survey on causal interpretable models from the aspects of the problems and methods. In addition, this survey provides in-depth insights into the existing evaluation metrics for measuring interpretability, which can help practitioners understand for what scenarios each evaluation metric is suitable.
A fundamental question for companies with large amount of logged data is: How to use such logged data together with incoming streaming data to make good decisions? Many companies currently make decisions via online A/B tests, but wrong decisions during testing hurt users experiences and cause irreversible damage. A typical alternative is offline causal inference, which analyzes logged data alone to make decisions. However, these decisions are not adaptive to the new incoming data, and so a wrong decision will continuously hurt users experiences. To overcome the aforementioned limitations, we propose a framework to unify offline causal inference algorithms (e.g., weighting, matching) and online learning algorithms (e.g., UCB, LinUCB). We propose novel algorithms and derive bounds on the decision accuracy via the notion of regret. We derive the first upper regret bound for forest-based online bandit algorithms. Experiments on two real datasets show that our algorithms outperform other algorithms that use only logged data or online feedbacks, or algorithms that do not use the data properly.
Adam is a widely used optimization method for training deep learning models. It computes individual adaptive learning rates for different parameters. In this paper, we propose a generalization of Adam, called Adambs, that allows us to also adapt to different training examples based on their importance in the models convergence. To achieve this, we maintain a distribution over all examples, selecting a mini-batch in each iteration by sampling according to this distribution, which we update using a multi-armed bandit algorithm. This ensures that examples that are more beneficial to the model training are sampled with higher probabilities. We theoretically show that Adambs improves the convergence rate of Adam---$O(sqrt{frac{log n}{T} })$ instead of $O(sqrt{frac{n}{T}})$ in some cases. Experiments on various models and datasets demonstrate Adambss fast convergence in practice.
We show that the popular reinforcement learning (RL) strategy of estimating the state-action value (Q-function) by minimizing the mean squared Bellman error leads to a regression problem with confounding, the inputs and output noise being correlated. Hence, direct minimization of the Bellman error can result in significantly biased Q-function estimates. We explain why fixing the target Q-network in Deep Q-Networks and Fitted Q Evaluation provides a way of overcoming this confounding, thus shedding new light on this popular but not well understood trick in the deep RL literature. An alternative approach to address confounding is to leverage techniques developed in the causality literature, notably instrumental variables (IV). We bring together here the literature on IV and RL by investigating whether IV approaches can lead to improved Q-function estimates. This paper analyzes and compares a wide range of recent IV methods in the context of offline policy evaluation (OPE), where the goal is to estimate the value of a policy using logged data only. By applying different IV techniques to OPE, we are not only able to recover previously proposed OPE methods such as model-based techniques but also to obtain competitive new techniques. We find empirically that state-of-the-art OPE methods are closely matched in performance by some IV methods such as AGMM, which were not developed for OPE. We open-source all our code and datasets at https://github.com/liyuan9988/IVOPEwithACME.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
