Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Raj Chetty

Publications and source records attributed to Raj Chetty.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Experimentally Validated Digital Twins: Evaluating Workforce Training Programs in the Age of Big Data

Modern program evaluation prioritizes evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) because prior research found that observational estimates of program impacts often diverge substantially from experimental benchmarks. We revisit this finding --- which was based on small survey datasets --- in the era of large-scale administrative data. Using anonymized income tax records covering all American adults between 1999 and 2025, we estimate the effects of workforce training programs on earnings by using machine learning models to predict counterfactuals from rich data on prior work histories, demographics, and residential locations. Rather than testing whether our observational estimates are unbiased, we use 37 RCTs to estimate the distribution of their bias. We find that our machine learning estimates closely match the RCT estimates, with root mean squared error (RMSE) comparable to that of the RCTs themselves. Our method reduces RMSE by 60% relative to parametric estimators used in prior work because our larger samples and richer covariates permit more flexible, higher-dimensional models of the counterfactual. Applying our method to a broader set of sites and enrollment years beyond the experimental sample, we find that treatment effects on earnings vary substantially across locations and over time, even within a given program. Programs that place more participants into target-sector jobs generate the largest earnings gains, with impacts that persist even after participants leave their initial jobs. These findings provide guidance for improving job training programs and, more broadly, illustrate a scalable approach to program evaluation that uses observational data to construct experimentally validated ``digital twins.''

econ.GN↗

Using Experiments to Correct for Selection in Observational Studies

Researchers increasingly have access to two types of data: (i) large observational datasets where treatment (e.g., class size) is not randomized but several primary outcomes (e.g., graduation rates) and secondary outcomes (e.g., test scores) are observed and (ii) experimental data in which treatment is randomized but only secondary outcomes are observed. We develop a new method to estimate treatment effects on primary outcomes in such settings. We use the difference between the secondary outcome and its predicted value based on the experimental treatment effect to measure selection bias in the observational data. Controlling for this estimate of selection bias yields an unbiased estimate of the treatment effect on the primary outcome under a new assumption that we term latent unconfoundedness, which requires that the same confounders affect the primary and secondary outcomes. Latent unconfoundedness weakens the assumptions underlying commonly used surrogate estimators. We apply our estimator to identify the effect of third grade class size on students outcomes. Estimated impacts on test scores using OLS regressions in observational school district data have the opposite sign of estimates from the Tennessee STAR experiment. In contrast, selection-corrected estimates in the observational data replicate the experimental estimates. Our estimator reveals that reducing class sizes by 25% increases high school graduation rates by 0.7 percentage points. Controlling for observables does not change the OLS estimates, demonstrating that experimental selection correction can remove biases that cannot be addressed with standard controls.

stat.ME↗

Estimating Treatment Effects using Multiple Surrogates: The Role of the Surrogate Score and the Surrogate Index

Estimating the long-term effects of treatments is of interest in many fields. A common challenge in estimating such treatment effects is that long-term outcomes are unobserved in the time frame needed to make policy decisions. One approach to overcome this missing data problem is to analyze treatments effects on an intermediate outcome, often called a statistical surrogate, if it satisfies the condition that treatment and outcome are independent conditional on the statistical surrogate. The validity of the surrogacy condition is often controversial. Here we exploit that fact that in modern datasets, researchers often observe a large number, possibly hundreds or thousands, of intermediate outcomes, thought to lie on or close to the causal chain between the treatment and the long-term outcome of interest. Even if none of the individual proxies satisfies the statistical surrogacy criterion by itself, using multiple proxies can be useful in causal inference. We focus primarily on a setting with two samples, an experimental sample containing data about the treatment indicator and the surrogates and an observational sample containing information about the surrogates and the primary outcome. We state assumptions under which the average treatment effect be identified and estimated with a high-dimensional vector of proxies that collectively satisfy the surrogacy assumption, and derive the bias from violations of the surrogacy assumption, and show that even if the primary outcome is also observed in the experimental sample, there is still information to be gained from using surrogates.

stat.ME↗