Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Nathan Kallus

Publications and source records attributed to Nathan Kallus.

At least 163 records · Page 9Linked to original sources

Balanced Policy Evaluation and Learning

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.

stat.ML↗

Classifying Treatment Responders Under Causal Effect Monotonicity

In the context of individual-level causal inference, we study the problem of predicting whether someone will respond or not to a treatment based on their features and past examples of features, treatment indicator (e.g., drug/no drug), and a binary outcome (e.g., recovery from disease). As a classification task, the problem is made difficult by not knowing the example outcomes under the opposite treatment indicators. We assume the effect is monotonic, as in advertising's effect on a purchase or bail-setting's effect on reappearance in court: either it would have happened regardless of treatment, not happened regardless, or happened only depending on exposure to treatment. Predicting whether the latter is latently the case is our focus. While previous work focuses on conditional average treatment effect estimation, formulating the problem as a classification task rather than an estimation task allows us to develop new tools more suited to this problem. By leveraging monotonicity, we develop new discriminative and generative algorithms for the responder-classification problem. We explore and discuss connections to corrupted data and policy learning. We provide an empirical study with both synthetic and real datasets to compare these specialized algorithms to standard benchmarks.

stat.ML↗

The Fairness of Risk Scores Beyond Classification: Bipartite Ranking and the xAUC Metric

Where machine-learned predictive risk scores inform high-stakes decisions, such as bail and sentencing in criminal justice, fairness has been a serious concern. Recent work has characterized the disparate impact that such risk scores can have when used for a binary classification task. This may not account, however, for the more diverse downstream uses of risk scores and their non-binary nature. To better account for this, in this paper, we investigate the fairness of predictive risk scores from the point of view of a bipartite ranking task, where one seeks to rank positive examples higher than negative ones. We introduce the xAUC disparity as a metric to assess the disparate impact of risk scores and define it as the difference in the probabilities of ranking a random positive example from one protected group above a negative one from another group and vice versa. We provide a decomposition of bipartite ranking loss into components that involve the discrepancy and components that involve pure predictive ability within each group. We use xAUC analysis to audit predictive risk scores for recidivism prediction, income prediction, and cardiac arrest prediction, where it describes disparities that are not evident from simply comparing within-group predictive performance.

cs.LG↗

More robust estimation of sample average treatment effects using Kernel Optimal Matching in an observational study of spine surgical interventions

Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), which has been used to estimate sample average treatment effects (SATE) using observational data, tenuously relies on the positivity assumption and the correct specification of the treatment assignment model, both of which are problematic assumptions in many observational studies. Various methods have been proposed to overcome these challenges, including truncation, covariate-balancing propensity scores, and stable balancing weights. Motivated by an observational study in spine surgery, in which positivity is violated and the true treatment assignment model is unknown, we present the use of optimal balancing by Kernel Optimal Matching (KOM) to estimate SATE. By uniformly controlling the conditional mean squared error of a weighted estimator over a class of models, KOM simultaneously mitigates issues of possible misspecification of the treatment assignment model and is able to handle practical violations of the positivity assumption, as shown in our simulation study. Using data from a clinical registry, we apply KOM to compare two spine surgical interventions and demonstrate how the result matches the conclusions of clinical trials that IPTW estimates spuriously refute.

stat.ME↗

Dynamic Assortment Personalization in High Dimensions

We study the problem of dynamic assortment personalization with large, heterogeneous populations and wide arrays of products, and demonstrate the importance of structural priors for effective, efficient large-scale personalization. Assortment personalization is the problem of choosing, for each individual (type), a best assortment of products, ads, or other offerings (items) so as to maximize revenue. This problem is central to revenue management in e-commerce and online advertising where both items and types can number in the millions. We formulate the dynamic assortment personalization problem as a discrete-contextual bandit with $m$ contexts (types) and exponentially many arms (assortments of the $n$ items). We assume that each type's preferences follow a simple parametric model with $n$ parameters. In all, there are $mn$ parameters, and existing literature suggests that order optimal regret scales as $mn$. However, the data required to estimate so many parameters is orders of magnitude larger than the data available in most revenue management applications; and the optimal regret under these models is unacceptably high. In this paper, we impose a natural structure on the problem -- a small latent dimension, or low rank. In the static setting, we show that this model can be efficiently learned from surprisingly few interactions, using a time- and memory-efficient optimization algorithm that converges globally whenever the model is learnable. In the dynamic setting, we show that structure-aware dynamic assortment personalization can have regret that is an order of magnitude smaller than structure-ignorant approaches. We validate our theoretical results empirically.

stat.ML↗

Fairness Under Unawareness: Assessing Disparity When Protected Class Is Unobserved

Assessing the fairness of a decision making system with respect to a protected class, such as gender or race, is challenging when class membership labels are unavailable. Probabilistic models for predicting the protected class based on observable proxies, such as surname and geolocation for race, are sometimes used to impute these missing labels for compliance assessments. Empirically, these methods are observed to exaggerate disparities, but the reason why is unknown. In this paper, we decompose the biases in estimating outcome disparity via threshold-based imputation into multiple interpretable bias sources, allowing us to explain when over- or underestimation occurs. We also propose an alternative weighted estimator that uses soft classification, and show that its bias arises simply from the conditional covariance of the outcome with the true class membership. Finally, we illustrate our results with numerical simulations and a public dataset of mortgage applications, using geolocation as a proxy for race. We confirm that the bias of threshold-based imputation is generally upward, but its magnitude varies strongly with the threshold chosen. Our new weighted estimator tends to have a negative bias that is much simpler to analyze and reason about.

stat.AP↗

Removing Hidden Confounding by Experimental Grounding

Observational data is increasingly used as a means for making individual-level causal predictions and intervention recommendations. The foremost challenge of causal inference from observational data is hidden confounding, whose presence cannot be tested in data and can invalidate any causal conclusion. Experimental data does not suffer from confounding but is usually limited in both scope and scale. We introduce a novel method of using limited experimental data to correct the hidden confounding in causal effect models trained on larger observational data, even if the observational data does not fully overlap with the experimental data. Our method makes strictly weaker assumptions than existing approaches, and we prove conditions under which it yields a consistent estimator. We demonstrate our method's efficacy using real-world data from a large educational experiment.

stat.ML↗

Interval Estimation of Individual-Level Causal Effects Under Unobserved Confounding

We study the problem of learning conditional average treatment effects (CATE) from observational data with unobserved confounders. The CATE function maps baseline covariates to individual causal effect predictions and is key for personalized assessments. Recent work has focused on how to learn CATE under unconfoundedness, i.e., when there are no unobserved confounders. Since CATE may not be identified when unconfoundedness is violated, we develop a functional interval estimator that predicts bounds on the individual causal effects under realistic violations of unconfoundedness. Our estimator takes the form of a weighted kernel estimator with weights that vary adversarially. We prove that our estimator is sharp in that it converges exactly to the tightest bounds possible on CATE when there may be unobserved confounders. Further, we study personalized decision rules derived from our estimator and prove that they achieve optimal minimax regret asymptotically. We assess our approach in a simulation study as well as demonstrate its application in the case of hormone replacement therapy by comparing conclusions from a real observational study and clinical trial.

stat.ML↗

From Predictive to Prescriptive Analytics

In this paper, we combine ideas from machine learning (ML) and operations research and management science (OR/MS) in developing a framework, along with specific methods, for using data to prescribe optimal decisions in OR/MS problems. In a departure from other work on data-driven optimization and reflecting our practical experience with the data available in applications of OR/MS, we consider data consisting, not only of observations of quantities with direct effect on costs/revenues, such as demand or returns, but predominantly of observations of associated auxiliary quantities. The main problem of interest is a conditional stochastic optimization problem, given imperfect observations, where the joint probability distributions that specify the problem are unknown. We demonstrate that our proposed solution methods, which are inspired by ML methods such as local regression, CART, and random forests, are generally applicable to a wide range of decision problems. We prove that they are tractable and asymptotically optimal even when data is not iid and may be censored. We extend this to the case where decision variables may directly affect uncertainty in unknown ways, such as pricing's effect on demand. As an analogue to R^2, we develop a metric P termed the coefficient of prescriptiveness to measure the prescriptive content of data and the efficacy of a policy from an operations perspective. To demonstrate the power of our approach in a real-world setting we study an inventory management problem faced by the distribution arm of an international media conglomerate, which ships an average of 1bil units per year. We leverage internal data and public online data harvested from IMDb, Rotten Tomatoes, and Google to prescribe operational decisions that outperform baseline measures. Specifically, the data we collect, leveraged by our methods, accounts for an 88\% improvement as measured by our P.

stat.ML↗

Residual Unfairness in Fair Machine Learning from Prejudiced Data

Recent work in fairness in machine learning has proposed adjusting for fairness by equalizing accuracy metrics across groups and has also studied how datasets affected by historical prejudices may lead to unfair decision policies. We connect these lines of work and study the residual unfairness that arises when a fairness-adjusted predictor is not actually fair on the target population due to systematic censoring of training data by existing biased policies. This scenario is particularly common in the same applications where fairness is a concern. We characterize theoretically the impact of such censoring on standard fairness metrics for binary classifiers and provide criteria for when residual unfairness may or may not appear. We prove that, under certain conditions, fairness-adjusted classifiers will in fact induce residual unfairness that perpetuates the same injustices, against the same groups, that biased the data to begin with, thus showing that even state-of-the-art fair machine learning can have a "bias in, bias out" property. When certain benchmark data is available, we show how sample reweighting can estimate and adjust fairness metrics while accounting for censoring. We use this to study the case of Stop, Question, and Frisk (SQF) and demonstrate that attempting to adjust for fairness perpetuates the same injustices that the policy is infamous for.

stat.ML↗

Causal Inference with Noisy and Missing Covariates via Matrix Factorization

Valid causal inference in observational studies often requires controlling for confounders. However, in practice measurements of confounders may be noisy, and can lead to biased estimates of causal effects. We show that we can reduce the bias caused by measurement noise using a large number of noisy measurements of the underlying confounders. We propose the use of matrix factorization to infer the confounders from noisy covariates, a flexible and principled framework that adapts to missing values, accommodates a wide variety of data types, and can augment many causal inference methods. We bound the error for the induced average treatment effect estimator and show it is consistent in a linear regression setting, using Exponential Family Matrix Completion preprocessing. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed procedure in numerical experiments with both synthetic data and real clinical data.

stat.ML↗

Learning Weighted Representations for Generalization Across Designs

Predictive models that generalize well under distributional shift are often desirable and sometimes crucial to building robust and reliable machine learning applications. We focus on distributional shift that arises in causal inference from observational data and in unsupervised domain adaptation. We pose both of these problems as prediction under a shift in design. Popular methods for overcoming distributional shift make unrealistic assumptions such as having a well-specified model or knowing the policy that gave rise to the observed data. Other methods are hindered by their need for a pre-specified metric for comparing observations, or by poor asymptotic properties. We devise a bound on the generalization error under design shift, incorporating both representation learning and sample re-weighting. Based on the bound, we propose an algorithmic framework that does not require any of the above assumptions and which is asymptotically consistent. We empirically study the new framework using two synthetic datasets, and demonstrate its effectiveness compared to previous methods.

stat.ML↗

Policy Evaluation and Optimization with Continuous Treatments

We study the problem of policy evaluation and learning from batched contextual bandit data when treatments are continuous, going beyond previous work on discrete treatments. Previous work for discrete treatment/action spaces focuses on inverse probability weighting (IPW) and doubly robust (DR) methods that use a rejection sampling approach for evaluation and the equivalent weighted classification problem for learning. In the continuous setting, this reduction fails as we would almost surely reject all observations. To tackle the case of continuous treatments, we extend the IPW and DR approaches to the continuous setting using a kernel function that leverages treatment proximity to attenuate discrete rejection. Our policy estimator is consistent and we characterize the optimal bandwidth. The resulting continuous policy optimizer (CPO) approach using our estimator achieves convergent regret and approaches the best-in-class policy for learnable policy classes. We demonstrate that the estimator performs well and, in particular, outperforms a discretization-based benchmark. We further study the performance of our policy optimizer in a case study on personalized dosing based on a dataset of Warfarin patients, their covariates, and final therapeutic doses. Our learned policy outperforms benchmarks and nears the oracle-best linear policy.

stat.ML↗

DeepMatch: Balancing Deep Covariate Representations for Causal Inference Using Adversarial Training

We study optimal covariate balance for causal inferences from observational data when rich covariates and complex relationships necessitate flexible modeling with neural networks. Standard approaches such as propensity weighting and matching/balancing fail in such settings due to miscalibrated propensity nets and inappropriate covariate representations, respectively. We propose a new method based on adversarial training of a weighting and a discriminator network that effectively addresses this methodological gap. This is demonstrated through new theoretical characterizations of the method as well as empirical results using both fully connected architectures to learn complex relationships and convolutional architectures to handle image confounders, showing how this new method can enable strong causal analyses in these challenging settings.

stat.ML↗

Generalized Optimal Matching Methods for Causal Inference

We develop an encompassing framework for matching, covariate balancing, and doubly-robust methods for causal inference from observational data called generalized optimal matching (GOM). The framework is given by generalizing a new functional-analytical formulation of optimal matching, giving rise to the class of GOM methods, for which we provide a single unified theory to analyze tractability, consistency, and efficiency. Many commonly used existing methods are included in GOM and, using their GOM interpretation, can be extended to optimally and automatically trade off balance for variance and outperform their standard counterparts. As a subclass, GOM gives rise to kernel optimal matching (KOM), which, as supported by new theoretical and empirical results, is notable for combining many of the positive properties of other methods in one. KOM, which is solved as a linearly-constrained convex-quadratic optimization problem, inherits both the interpretability and model-free consistency of matching but can also achieve the $\sqrt{n}$-consistency of well-specified regression and the efficiency and robustness of doubly robust methods. In settings of limited overlap, KOM enables a very transparent method for interval estimation for partial identification and robust coverage. We demonstrate these benefits in examples with both synthetic and real data

stat.ML↗

Optimal A Priori Balance in the Design of Controlled Experiments

We develop a unified theory of designs for controlled experiments that balance baseline covariates a priori (before treatment and before randomization) using the framework of minimax variance and a new method called kernel allocation. We show that any notion of a priori balance must go hand in hand with a notion of structure, since with no structure on the dependence of outcomes on baseline covariates complete randomization (no special covariate balance) is always minimax optimal. Restricting the structure of dependence, either parametrically or non-parametrically, gives rise to certain covariate imbalance metrics and optimal designs. This recovers many popular imbalance metrics and designs previously developed ad hoc, including randomized block designs, pairwise-matched allocation and rerandomization. We develop a new design method called kernel allocation based on the optimal design when structure is expressed by using kernels, which can be parametric or non-parametric. Relying on modern optimization methods, kernel allocation, which ensures nearly perfect covariate balance without biasing estimates under model misspecification, offers sizable advantages in precision and power as demonstrated in a range of real and synthetic examples. We provide strong theoretical guarantees on variance, consistency and rates of convergence and develop special algorithms for design and hypothesis testing.

math.ST↗

Recursive Partitioning for Personalization using Observational Data

We study the problem of learning to choose from m discrete treatment options (e.g., news item or medical drug) the one with best causal effect for a particular instance (e.g., user or patient) where the training data consists of passive observations of covariates, treatment, and the outcome of the treatment. The standard approach to this problem is regress and compare: split the training data by treatment, fit a regression model in each split, and, for a new instance, predict all m outcomes and pick the best. By reformulating the problem as a single learning task rather than m separate ones, we propose a new approach based on recursively partitioning the data into regimes where different treatments are optimal. We extend this approach to an optimal partitioning approach that finds a globally optimal partition, achieving a compact, interpretable, and impactful personalization model. We develop new tools for validating and evaluating personalization models on observational data and use these to demonstrate the power of our novel approaches in a personalized medicine and a job training application.

stat.ML↗

Instrument-Armed Bandits

We extend the classic multi-armed bandit (MAB) model to the setting of noncompliance, where the arm pull is a mere instrument and the treatment applied may differ from it, which gives rise to the instrument-armed bandit (IAB) problem. The IAB setting is relevant whenever the experimental units are human since free will, ethics, and the law may prohibit unrestricted or forced application of treatment. In particular, the setting is relevant in bandit models of dynamic clinical trials and other controlled trials on human interventions. Nonetheless, the setting has not been fully investigate in the bandit literature. We show that there are various and divergent notions of regret in this setting, all of which coincide only in the classic MAB setting. We characterize the behavior of these regrets and analyze standard MAB algorithms. We argue for a particular kind of regret that captures the causal effect of treatments but show that standard MAB algorithms cannot achieve sublinear control on this regret. Instead, we develop new algorithms for the IAB problem, prove new regret bounds for them, and compare them to standard MAB algorithms in numerical examples.

stat.ML↗