arXiv subjects

Jesse H. Krijthe

Publications and source records attributed to Jesse H. Krijthe.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Robust estimation of heterogeneous treatment effects in randomized trials leveraging external data

Randomized trials are typically designed to detect average treatment effects but often lack the statistical power to uncover individual-level treatment effect heterogeneity, limiting their value for personalized decision-making. To address this, we propose the QR-learner, a model-agnostic learner that estimates conditional average treatment effects (CATE) within the trial population by leveraging external data from other trials or observational studies. The proposed method is robust: it can reduce the mean squared error relative to a trial-only CATE learner, and is guaranteed to recover the true CATE even when the external data are not aligned with the trial. Moreover, we introduce a procedure that combines the QR-learner with a trial-only CATE learner and show that it asymptotically matches or exceeds both component learners in terms of mean squared error. We examine the performance of our approach in simulation studies and apply the methods to a real-world dataset, demonstrating improvements in both CATE estimation and statistical power for detecting heterogeneous effects.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2025

Qini Curve Estimation under Clustered Network Interference

Qini curves are a widely used tool for assessing treatment policies under allocation constraints as they visualize the incremental gain of a new treatment policy versus the cost of its implementation. Standard Qini curve estimation assumes no interference between units: that is, that treating one unit does not influence the outcome of any other unit. In many real-life applications such as public policy or marketing, however, the presence of interference is common. Ignoring interference in these scenarios can lead to systematically biased Qini curves that over- or under-estimate a treatment policy's cost-effectiveness. In this paper, we address the problem of Qini curve estimation under clustered network interference, where interfering units form independent clusters. We propose a formal description of the problem setting with an experimental study design under which we can account for clustered network interference. Within this framework, we describe three estimation strategies, each suited to different conditions, and provide guidance for selecting the most appropriate approach by highlighting the inherent bias-variance trade-offs. To complement our theoretical analysis, we introduce a marketplace simulator that replicates clustered network interference in a typical e-commerce environment, allowing us to evaluate and compare the proposed strategies in practice.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2025

Robust integration of external control data in randomized trials

One approach for increasing the efficiency of randomized trials is the use of "external controls" -- individuals who received the control treatment studied in the trial during routine practice or in prior experimental studies. Existing external control methods, however, can be biased if the populations underlying the trial and the external control data are not exchangeable. Here, we characterize a randomization-aware class of treatment effect estimators in the population underlying the trial that remain consistent and asymptotically normal when using external control data, even when exchangeability does not hold. We consider two members of this class of estimators: the well-known augmented inverse probability weighting trial-only estimator, which is the efficient estimator when only trial data are used; and a potentially more efficient member of the class when exchangeability holds and external control data are available, which we refer to as the optimized randomization-aware estimator. To achieve robust integration of external control data in trial analyses, we then propose a combined estimator based on the efficient trial-only estimator and the optimized randomization-aware estimator. We show that the combined estimator is consistent and no less efficient than the most efficient of the two component estimators, whether the exchangeability assumption holds or not. We examine the estimators' performance in simulations and we illustrate their use with data from two trials of paliperidone extended-release for schizophrenia.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2025

The risks of risk assessment: causal blind spots when using prediction models for treatment decisions

Clinicians increasingly rely on prediction models to guide treatment choices. Most prediction models, however, are developed using observational data that include some patients who have already received the treatment the prediction model is meant to inform. Special attention to the causal role of those earlier treatments is required when interpreting the resulting predictions. We identify 'causal blind spots' in three common approaches to handling treatment when developing a prediction model: including treatment as a predictor, restricting to individuals taking a certain treatment, and ignoring treatment. Through several real examples, we illustrate how the risks obtained from models developed using such approaches may be misinterpreted and can lead to misinformed decision-making. Our discussion covers issues attributable to confounding, selection, mediation and changes in treatment protocols over time. We advocate for an extension of guidelines for the development, reporting and evaluation of prediction models to avoid such misinterpretations. Developers must ensure that the intended target population for the model, and the treatment conditions under which predictions hold, are clearly communicated. When prediction models are intended to inform treatment decisions, they need to provide estimates of risk under the specific treatment (or intervention) options being considered, known as 'prediction under interventions'. Next to suitable data, this requires causal reasoning and causal inference techniques during model development and evaluation. Being clear about what a given prediction model can and cannot be used for prevents misinformed treatment decisions and thereby prevents potential harm to patients.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2025

Falsification of Unconfoundedness by Testing Independence of Causal Mechanisms

A major challenge in estimating treatment effects in observational studies is the reliance on untestable conditions such as the assumption of no unmeasured confounding. In this work, we propose an algorithm that can falsify the assumption of no unmeasured confounding in a setting with observational data from multiple heterogeneous sources, which we refer to as environments. Our proposed falsification strategy leverages a key observation that unmeasured confounding can cause observed causal mechanisms to appear dependent. Building on this observation, we develop a novel two-stage procedure that detects these dependencies with high statistical power while controlling false positives. The algorithm does not require access to randomized data and, in contrast to other falsification approaches, functions even under transportability violations when the environment has a direct effect on the outcome of interest. To showcase the practical relevance of our approach, we show that our method is able to efficiently detect confounding on both simulated and semi-synthetic data.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2025

Irregular measurement times in estimating time-varying treatment effects: Categorizing biases and comparing adjustment methods

To estimate the causal effect of treatments that vary over time from observational data, one must adjust for time-varying confounding. A common procedure to address confounding is the use of inverse probability of treatment weighting methods. However, the timing of covariate measurements is often irregular, which may introduce additional confounding bias as well as selection bias into the causal effect estimate. Two reweighting methods have been proposed to adjust for these biases: time-as-confounder and reweighting by measurement time. However, it is currently not well understood in which situations these irregularly timed measurements induce bias, and how the available reweighting methods compare to each other in different situations. In this work, we provide a complete inventarization of all possible backdoor paths through which bias is induced. Based on these paths, we distinguish three categories of confounding bias by measurement time: direct confounding (DC), confounding through measured variables (CMV), and confounding through unmeasured variables (CUV). These categories differ in the assumptions and reweighting methods necessary to adjust for bias and may occur simultaneously with selection bias. Through simulation studies, we illustrate: 1. Reweighting by measurement time may be used to adjust for selection bias and confounding through measured variables; 2. Time-as-confounder may be used to adjust for all categories of confounding bias, but not selection bias; 3. In some cases, the use of a combination of both techniques may be used to adjust for both confounding and selection bias. We finally apply the categorization and reweighting methods on the pre-DIVA data set. Adjusting for measurement times is crucial in order to avoid bias, and the categorization of biases and techniques that we introduce may help researchers to choose the appropriate analysis.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2024

When accurate prediction models yield harmful self-fulfilling prophecies

Prediction models are popular in medical research and practice. By predicting an outcome of interest for specific patients, these models may help inform difficult treatment decisions, and are often hailed as the poster children for personalized, data-driven healthcare. We show however, that using prediction models for decision making can lead to harmful decisions, even when the predictions exhibit good discrimination after deployment. These models are harmful self-fulfilling prophecies: their deployment harms a group of patients but the worse outcome of these patients does not invalidate the predictive power of the model. Our main result is a formal characterization of a set of such prediction models. Next we show that models that are well calibrated before and after deployment are useless for decision making as they made no change in the data distribution. These results point to the need to revise standard practices for validation, deployment and evaluation of prediction models that are used in medical decisions.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2023

Detecting hidden confounding in observational data using multiple environments

A common assumption in causal inference from observational data is that there is no hidden confounding. Yet it is, in general, impossible to verify this assumption from a single dataset. Under the assumption of independent causal mechanisms underlying the data-generating process, we demonstrate a way to detect unobserved confounders when having multiple observational datasets coming from different environments. We present a theory for testable conditional independencies that are only absent when there is hidden confounding and examine cases where we violate its assumptions: degenerate & dependent mechanisms, and faithfulness violations. Additionally, we propose a procedure to test these independencies and study its empirical finite-sample behavior using simulation studies and semi-synthetic data based on a real-world dataset. In most cases, the proposed procedure correctly predicts the presence of hidden confounding, particularly when the confounding bias is large.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2020

ReproducedPapers.org: Openly teaching and structuring machine learning reproducibility

We present ReproducedPapers.org: an open online repository for teaching and structuring machine learning reproducibility. We evaluate doing a reproduction project among students and the added value of an online reproduction repository among AI researchers. We use anonymous self-assessment surveys and obtained 144 responses. Results suggest that students who do a reproduction project place more value on scientific reproductions and become more critical thinkers. Students and AI researchers agree that our online reproduction repository is valuable.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2020

A Brief Prehistory of Double Descent

In their thought-provoking paper [1], Belkin et al. illustrate and discuss the shape of risk curves in the context of modern high-complexity learners. Given a fixed training sample size $n$, such curves show the risk of a learner as a function of some (approximate) measure of its complexity $N$. With $N$ the number of features, these curves are also referred to as feature curves. A salient observation in [1] is that these curves can display, what they call, double descent: with increasing $N$, the risk initially decreases, attains a minimum, and then increases until $N$ equals $n$, where the training data is fitted perfectly. Increasing $N$ even further, the risk decreases a second and final time, creating a peak at $N=n$. This twofold descent may come as a surprise, but as opposed to what [1] reports, it has not been overlooked historically. Our letter draws attention to some original, earlier findings, of interest to contemporary machine learning.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2019

Robust importance-weighted cross-validation under sample selection bias

Cross-validation under sample selection bias can, in principle, be done by importance-weighting the empirical risk. However, the importance-weighted risk estimator produces sub-optimal hyperparameter estimates in problem settings where large weights arise with high probability. We study its sampling variance as a function of the training data distribution and introduce a control variate to increase its robustness to problematically large weights.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2019

The Pessimistic Limits and Possibilities of Margin-based Losses in Semi-supervised Learning

Consider a classification problem where we have both labeled and unlabeled data available. We show that for linear classifiers defined by convex margin-based surrogate losses that are decreasing, it is impossible to construct any semi-supervised approach that is able to guarantee an improvement over the supervised classifier measured by this surrogate loss on the labeled and unlabeled data. For convex margin-based loss functions that also increase, we demonstrate safe improvements are possible.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2017

On Measuring and Quantifying Performance: Error Rates, Surrogate Loss, and an Example in SSL

In various approaches to learning, notably in domain adaptation, active learning, learning under covariate shift, semi-supervised learning, learning with concept drift, and the like, one often wants to compare a baseline classifier to one or more advanced (or at least different) strategies. In this chapter, we basically argue that if such classifiers, in their respective training phases, optimize a so-called surrogate loss that it may also be valuable to compare the behavior of this loss on the test set, next to the regular classification error rate. It can provide us with an additional view on the classifiers' relative performances that error rates cannot capture. As an example, limited but convincing empirical results demonstrates that we may be able to find semi-supervised learning strategies that can guarantee performance improvements with increasing numbers of unlabeled data in terms of log-likelihood. In contrast, the latter may be impossible to guarantee for the classification error rate.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2017

Nuclear Discrepancy for Active Learning

Active learning algorithms propose which unlabeled objects should be queried for their labels to improve a predictive model the most. We study active learners that minimize generalization bounds and uncover relationships between these bounds that lead to an improved approach to active learning. In particular we show the relation between the bound of the state-of-the-art Maximum Mean Discrepancy (MMD) active learner, the bound of the Discrepancy, and a new and looser bound that we refer to as the Nuclear Discrepancy bound. We motivate this bound by a probabilistic argument: we show it considers situations which are more likely to occur. Our experiments indicate that active learning using the tightest Discrepancy bound performs the worst in terms of the squared loss. Overall, our proposed loosest Nuclear Discrepancy generalization bound performs the best. We confirm our probabilistic argument empirically: the other bounds focus on more pessimistic scenarios that are rarer in practice. We conclude that tightness of bounds is not always of main importance and that active learning methods should concentrate on realistic scenarios in order to improve performance.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2017

Robust Semi-supervised Least Squares Classification by Implicit Constraints

We introduce the implicitly constrained least squares (ICLS) classifier, a novel semi-supervised version of the least squares classifier. This classifier minimizes the squared loss on the labeled data among the set of parameters implied by all possible labelings of the unlabeled data. Unlike other discriminative semi-supervised methods, this approach does not introduce explicit additional assumptions into the objective function, but leverages implicit assumptions already present in the choice of the supervised least squares classifier. This method can be formulated as a quadratic programming problem and its solution can be found using a simple gradient descent procedure. We prove that, in a limited 1-dimensional setting, this approach never leads to performance worse than the supervised classifier. Experimental results show that also in the general multidimensional case performance improvements can be expected, both in terms of the squared loss that is intrinsic to the classifier, as well as in terms of the expected classification error.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2016

Reproducible Pattern Recognition Research: The Case of Optimistic SSL

In this paper, we discuss the approaches we took and trade-offs involved in making a paper on a conceptual topic in pattern recognition research fully reproducible. We discuss our definition of reproducibility, the tools used, how the analysis was set up, show some examples of alternative analyses the code enables and discuss our views on reproducibility.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2016

RSSL: Semi-supervised Learning in R

In this paper, we introduce a package for semi-supervised learning research in the R programming language called RSSL. We cover the purpose of the package, the methods it includes and comment on their use and implementation. We then show, using several code examples, how the package can be used to replicate well-known results from the semi-supervised learning literature.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2016

The Peaking Phenomenon in Semi-supervised Learning

For the supervised least squares classifier, when the number of training objects is smaller than the dimensionality of the data, adding more data to the training set may first increase the error rate before decreasing it. This, possibly counterintuitive, phenomenon is known as peaking. In this work, we observe that a similar but more pronounced version of this phenomenon also occurs in the semi-supervised setting, where instead of labeled objects, unlabeled objects are added to the training set. We explain why the learning curve has a more steep incline and a more gradual decline in this setting through simulation studies and by applying an approximation of the learning curve based on the work by Raudys & Duin.

stat.ML↗