Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userParKCa: Causal Inference with Partially Known Causes
67
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Methods for causal inference from observational data are an alternative for scenarios where collecting counterfactual data or realizing a randomized experiment is not possible. Adopting a stacking approach, our proposed method ParKCA combines the results of several causal inference methods to learn new causes in applications with some known causes and many potential causes. We validate ParKCA in two Genome-wide association studies, one real-world and one simulated dataset. Our results show that ParKCA can infer more causes than existing methods.
rate research
Read More
Online platforms regularly conduct randomized experiments to understand how changes to the platform causally affect various outcomes of interest. However, experimentation on online platforms has been criticized for having, among other issues, a lack of meaningful oversight and user consent. As platforms give users greater agency, it becomes possible to conduct observational studies in which users self-select into the treatment of interest as an alternative to experiments in which the platform controls whether the user receives treatment or not. In this paper, we conduct four large-scale within-study comparisons on Twitter aimed at assessing the effectiveness of observational studies derived from user self-selection on online platforms. In a within-study comparison, treatment effects from an observational study are assessed based on how effectively they replicate results from a randomized experiment with the same target population. We test the naive difference in group means estimator, exact matching, regression adjustment, and inverse probability of treatment weighting while controlling for plausible confounding variables. In all cases, all observational estimates perform poorly at recovering the ground-truth estimate from the analogous randomized experiments. In all cases except one, the observational estimates have the opposite sign of the randomized estimate. Our results suggest that observational studies derived from user self-selection are a poor alternative to randomized experimentation on online platforms. In discussing our results, we postulate Catch-22s that suggest that the success of causal inference in these settings may be at odds with the original motivations for providing users with greater agency.
Heterogeneity in medical data, e.g., from data collected at different sites and with different protocols in a clinical study, is a fundamental hurdle for accurate prediction using machine learning models, as such models often fail to generalize well. This paper leverages a recently proposed normalizing-flow-based method to perform counterfactual inference upon a structural causal model (SCM), in order to achieve harmonization of such data. A causal model is used to model observed effects (brain magnetic resonance imaging data) that result from known confounders (site, gender and age) and exogenous noise variables. Our formulation exploits the bijection induced by flow for the purpose of harmonization. We infer the posterior of exogenous variables, intervene on observations, and draw samples from the resultant SCM to obtain counterfactuals. This approach is evaluated extensively on multiple, large, real-world medical datasets and displayed better cross-domain generalization compared to state-of-the-art algorithms. Further experiments that evaluate the quality of confounder-independent data generated by our model using regression and classification tasks are provided.
Constraint-based causal discovery from limited data is a notoriously difficult challenge due to the many borderline independence test decisions. Several approaches to improve the reliability of the predictions by exploiting redundancy in the independence information have been proposed recently. Though promising, existing approaches can still be greatly improved in terms of accuracy and scalability. We present a novel method that reduces the combinatorial explosion of the search space by using a more coarse-grained representation of causal information, drastically reducing computation time. Additionally, we propose a method to score causal predictions based on their confidence. Crucially, our implementation also allows one to easily combine observational and interventional data and to incorporate various types of available background knowledge. We prove soundness and asymptotic consistency of our method and demonstrate that it can outperform the state-of-the-art on synthetic data, achieving a speedup of several orders of magnitude. We illustrate its practical feasibility by applying it on a challenging protein data set.
Learning the causal structure that underlies data is a crucial step towards robust real-world decision making. The majority of existing work in causal inference focuses on determining a single directed acyclic graph (DAG) or a Markov equivalence class thereof. However, a crucial aspect to acting intelligently upon the knowledge about causal structure which has been inferred from finite data demands reasoning about its uncertainty. For instance, planning interventions to find out more about the causal mechanisms that govern our data requires quantifying epistemic uncertainty over DAGs. While Bayesian causal inference allows to do so, the posterior over DAGs becomes intractable even for a small number of variables. Aiming to overcome this issue, we propose a form of variational inference over the graphs of Structural Causal Models (SCMs). To this end, we introduce a parametric variational family modelled by an autoregressive distribution over the space of discrete DAGs. Its number of parameters does not grow exponentially with the number of variables and can be tractably learned by maximising an Evidence Lower Bound (ELBO). In our experiments, we demonstrate that the proposed variational posterior is able to provide a good approximation of the true posterior.
Does adding a theorem to a paper affect its chance of acceptance? Does labeling a post with the authors gender affect the post popularity? This paper develops a method to estimate such causal effects from observational text data, adjusting for confounding features of the text such as the subject or writing quality. We assume that the text suffices for causal adjustment but that, in practice, it is prohibitively high-dimensional. To address this challenge, we develop causally sufficient embeddings, low-dimensional document representations that preserve sufficient information for causal identification and allow for efficient estimation of causal effects. Causally sufficient embeddings combine two ideas. The first is supervised dimensionality reduction: causal adjustment requires only the aspects of text that are predictive of both the treatment and outcome. The second is efficient language modeling: representations of text are designed to dispose of linguistically irrelevant information, and this information is also causally irrelevant. Our method adapts language models (specifically, word embeddings and topic models) to learn document embeddings that are able to predict both treatment and outcome. We study causally sufficient embeddings with semi-synthetic datasets and find that they improve causal estimation over related embedding methods. We illustrate the methods by answering the two motivating questions---the effect of a theorem on paper acceptance and the effect of a gender label on post popularity. Code and data available at https://github.com/vveitch/causal-text-embeddings-tf2}{github.com/vveitch/causal-text-embeddings-tf2
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
