SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2509.18148

Augmenting Limited and Biased RCTs through Pseudo-Sample Matching-Based Observational Data Fusion Method

Abstract

In the online ride-hailing pricing context, companies often conduct randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and utilize uplift models to assess the effect of discounts on customer orders, which substantially influences competitive market outcomes. However, due to the high cost of RCTs, the proportion of trial data relative to observational data is small, which only accounts for 0.65\% of total traffic in our context, resulting in significant bias when generalizing to the broader user base. Additionally, the complexity of industrial processes reduces the quality of RCT data, which is often subject to heterogeneity from potential interference and selection bias, making it difficult to correct. Moreover, existing data fusion methods are challenging to implement effectively in complex industrial settings due to the high dimensionality of features and the strict assumptions that are hard to verify with real-world data. To address these issues, we propose an empirical data fusion method called pseudo-sample matching. By generating pseudo-samples from biased, low-quality RCT data and matching them with the most similar samples from large-scale observational data, the method expands the RCT dataset while mitigating its heterogeneity. We validated the method through simulation experiments, conducted offline and online tests using real-world data. In a week-long online experiment, we achieved a 0.41\% improvement in profit, which is a considerable gain when scaled to industrial scenarios with hundreds of millions in revenue. In addition, we discuss the harm to model training, offline evaluation, and online economic benefits when the RCT data quality is not high, and emphasize the importance of improving RCT data quality in industrial scenarios. Further details of the simulation experiments can be found in the GitHub repository https://github.com/Kairong-Han/Pseudo-Matching.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Kairong Han, Weidong Huang, Taiyang Zhou, Peng Zhen, Kun Kuang. 2025-09-16. Augmenting Limited and Biased RCTs through Pseudo-Sample Matching-Based Observational Data Fusion Method. https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.18148

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME