The widely used 'Counterfactual' definition of Causal Effects was derived for unbiasedness and accuracy - and not generalizability. We propose a simple definition for the External Validity (EV) of Interventions and Counterfactuals. The definition leads to EV statistics for individual counterfactuals, and to non-parametric effect estimators for sets of counterfactuals (i.e., for samples). We use this new definition to discuss several issues that have baffled the original counterfactual formulation: out-of-sample validity, reliance on independence assumptions or estimation, concurrent estimation of multiple effects and full-models, bias-variance tradeoffs, statistical power, omitted variables, and connections to current predictive and explaining techniques. Methodologically, the definition also allows us to replace the parametric, and generally ill-posed, estimation problems that followed the counterfactual definition by combinatorial enumeration problems in non-experimental samples. We use this framework to generalize popular supervised, explaining, and causal-effect estimators, improving their performance across three dimensions (External Validity, Unconfoundness and Accuracy) and enabling their use in non-i.i.d. samples. We demonstrate gains over the state-of-the-art in out-of-sample prediction, intervention effect prediction and causal effect estimation tasks. The COVID19 pandemic highlighted the need for learning solutions to provide general predictions in small samples - many times with missing variables. We also demonstrate applications in this pressing problem.

We propose a new method to estimate causal effects from nonexperimental data. Each pair of sample units is first associated with a stochastic 'treatment' - differences in factors between units - and an effect - a resultant outcome difference. It is then proposed that all such pairs can be combined to provide more accurate estimates of causal effects in observational data, provided a statistical model connecting combinatorial properties of treatments to the accuracy and unbiasedness of their effects. The article introduces one such model and a Bayesian approach to combine the $O(n^2)$ pairwise observations typically available in nonexperimnetal data. This also leads to an interpretation of nonexperimental datasets as incomplete, or noisy, versions of ideal factorial experimental designs. This approach to causal effect estimation has several advantages: (1) it expands the number of observations, converting thousands of individuals into millions of observational treatments; (2) starting with treatments closest to the experimental ideal, it identifies noncausal variables that can be ignored in the future, making estimation easier in each subsequent iteration while departing minimally from experiment-like conditions; (3) it recovers individual causal effects in heterogeneous populations. We evaluate the method in simulations and the National Supported Work (NSW) program, an intensively studied program whose effects are known from randomized field experiments. We demonstrate that the proposed approach recovers causal effects in common NSW samples, as well as in arbitrary subpopulations and an order-of-magnitude larger supersample with the entire national program data, outperforming Statistical, Econometrics and Machine Learning estimators in all cases...

This review presents empirical researchers with recent advances in causal inference, and stresses the paradigmatic shifts that must be undertaken in moving from traditional statistical analysis to causal analysis of multivariate data. Special emphasis is placed on the assumptions that underly all causal inferences, the languages used in formulating those assumptions, the conditional nature of all causal and counterfactual claims, and the methods that have been developed for the assessment of such claims. These advances are illustrated using a general theory of causation based on the Structural Causal Model (SCM) described in Pearl (2000a), which subsumes and unifies other approaches to causation, and provides a coherent mathematical foundation for the analysis of causes and counterfactuals. In particular, the paper surveys the development of mathematical tools for inferring (from a combination of data and assumptions) answers to three types of causal queries: (1) queries about the effects of potential interventions, (also called "causal effects" or "policy evaluation") (2) queries about probabilities of counterfactuals, (including assessment of "regret," "attribution" or "causes of effects") and (3) queries about direct and indirect effects (also known as "mediation"). Finally, the paper defines the formal and conceptual relationships between the structural and potential-outcome frameworks and presents tools for a symbiotic analysis that uses the strong features of both.

基于AI和机器学习的决策系统已在各种现实世界中都使用，包括医疗保健，执法，教育和金融。不再是牵强的，即设想一个未来，自治系统将推动整个业务决策，并且更广泛地支持大规模决策基础设施以解决社会最具挑战性的问题。当人类做出决定时，不公平和歧视的问题普遍存在，并且当使用几乎没有透明度，问责制和公平性的机器做出决定时（或可能会放大）。在本文中，我们介绍了\ textit {Causal公平分析}的框架，目的是填补此差距，即理解，建模，并可能解决决策设置中的公平性问题。我们方法的主要见解是将观察到数据中存在的差异的量化与基本且通常是未观察到的因果机制收集的因果机制的收集，这些机制首先会产生差异，挑战我们称之为因果公平的基本问题分析（FPCFA）。为了解决FPCFA，我们研究了分解差异和公平性的经验度量的问题，将这种变化归因于结构机制和人群的不同单位。我们的努力最终达到了公平地图，这是组织和解释文献中不同标准之间关系的首次系统尝试。最后，我们研究了进行因果公平分析并提出一本公平食谱的最低因果假设，该假设使数据科学家能够评估不同影响和不同治疗的存在。

因果关系是理解世界的科学努力的基本组成部分。不幸的是，在心理学和社会科学中，因果关系仍然是禁忌。由于越来越多的建议采用因果方法进行研究的重要性，我们重新制定了心理学研究方法的典型方法，以使不可避免的因果理论与其余的研究渠道协调。我们提出了一个新的过程，该过程始于从因果发现和机器学习的融合中纳入技术的发展，验证和透明的理论形式规范。然后，我们提出将完全指定的理论模型的复杂性降低到与给定目标假设相关的基本子模型中的方法。从这里，我们确定利息量是否可以从数据中估算出来，如果是的，则建议使用半参数机器学习方法来估计因果关系。总体目标是介绍新的研究管道，该管道可以（a）促进与测试因果理论的愿望兼容的科学询问（b）鼓励我们的理论透明代表作为明确的数学对象，（c）将我们的统计模型绑定到我们的统计模型中该理论的特定属性，因此减少了理论到模型间隙通常引起的规范不足问题，以及（d）产生因果关系和可重复性的结果和估计。通过具有现实世界数据的教学示例来证明该过程，我们以摘要和讨论来结论。

估计平均因果效应的理想回归（如果有）是什么？我们在离散协变量的设置中研究了这个问题，从而得出了各种分层估计器的有限样本方差的表达式。这种方法阐明了许多广泛引用的结果的基本统计现象。我们的博览会结合了研究因果效应估计的三种不同的方法论传统的见解：潜在结果，因果图和具有加性误差的结构模型。

有许多可用于选择优先考虑治疗的可用方法，包括基于治疗效果估计，风险评分和手工制作规则的遵循申请。我们将秩加权平均治疗效应（RATY）指标作为一种简单常见的指标系列，用于比较水平竞争范围的治疗优先级规则。对于如何获得优先级规则，率是不可知的，并且仅根据他们在识别受益于治疗中受益的单位的方式进行评估。我们定义了一系列速率估算器，并证明了一个中央限位定理，可以在各种随机和观测研究环境中实现渐近精确的推断。我们为使用自主置信区间的使用提供了理由，以及用于测试关于治疗效果中的异质性的假设的框架，与优先级规则相关。我们对速率的定义嵌套了许多现有度量，包括QINI系数，以及我们的分析直接产生了这些指标的推论方法。我们展示了我们从个性化医学和营销的示例中的方法。在医疗环境中，使用来自Sprint和Accor-BP随机对照试验的数据，我们发现没有明显的证据证明异质治疗效果。另一方面，在大量的营销审判中，我们在一些数字广告活动的治疗效果中发现了具有的强大证据，并证明了如何使用率如何比较优先考虑估计风险的目标规则与估计治疗效益优先考虑的目标规则。

大型观察数据越来越多地提供健康，经济和社会科学等学科，研究人员对因果问题而不是预测感兴趣。在本文中，从旨在调查参与学校膳食计划对健康指标的实证研究，研究了使用非参数回归的方法估算异质治疗效果的问题。首先，我们介绍了与观察或非完全随机数据进行因果推断相关的设置和相关的问题，以及如何在统计学习工具的帮助下解决这些问题。然后，我们审查并制定现有最先进的框架的统一分类，允许通过非参数回归模型来估算单个治疗效果。在介绍模型选择问题的简要概述后，我们说明了一些关于三种不同模拟研究的方法的性能。我们通过展示一些关于学校膳食计划数据的实证分析的一些方法的使用来结束。

This work shows how to leverage causal inference to understand the behavior of complex learning systems interacting with their environment and predict the consequences of changes to the system. Such predictions allow both humans and algorithms to select the changes that would have improved the system performance. This work is illustrated by experiments on the ad placement system associated with the Bing search engine.

在本文中，我们提出了一种非参数估计的方法，并推断了一般样本选择模型中因果效应参数的异质界限，初始治疗可能会影响干预后结果是否观察到。可观察到的协变量可能会混淆治疗选择，而观察结果和不可观察的结果可能会混淆。该方法提供条件效应界限作为策略相关的预处理变量的功能。它允许对身份不明的条件效应曲线进行有效的统计推断。我们使用灵活的半参数脱偏机学习方法，该方法可以适应柔性功能形式和治疗，选择和结果过程之间的高维混杂变量。还提供了易于验证的高级条件，以进行估计和错误指定的鲁棒推理保证。

通常使用参数模型进行经验领域的参数估计，并且此类模型很容易促进统计推断。不幸的是，它们不太可能足够灵活，无法充分建模现实现象，并可能产生偏见的估计。相反，非参数方法是灵活的，但不容易促进统计推断，并且仍然可能表现出残留的偏见。我们探索了影响功能（IFS）的潜力（a）改善初始估计器而无需更多数据（b）增加模型的鲁棒性和（c）促进统计推断。我们首先对IFS进行广泛的介绍，并提出了一种神经网络方法“ Multinet”，该方法使用单个体系结构寻求合奏的多样性。我们还介绍了我们称为“ Multistep”的IF更新步骤的变体，并对不同方法提供了全面的评估。发现这些改进是依赖数据集的，这表明所使用的方法与数据生成过程的性质之间存在相互作用。我们的实验强调了从业人员需要通过不同的估计器组合进行多次分析来检查其发现的一致性。我们还表明，可以改善“自由”的现有神经网络，而无需更多数据，而无需重新训练。

在制定政策指南时，随机对照试验（RCT）代表了黄金标准。但是，RCT通常是狭窄的，并且缺乏更广泛的感兴趣人群的数据。这些人群中的因果效应通常是使用观察数据集估算的，这可能会遭受未观察到的混杂和选择偏见。考虑到一组观察估计（例如，来自多项研究），我们提出了一个试图拒绝偏见的观察性估计值的元偏值。我们使用验证效应，可以从RCT和观察数据中推断出的因果效应。在拒绝未通过此测试的估计器之后，我们对RCT中未观察到的亚组的外推性效应产生了保守的置信区间。假设至少一个观察估计量在验证和外推效果方面是渐近正常且一致的，我们为我们算法输出的间隔的覆盖率概率提供了保证。为了促进在跨数据集的因果效应运输的设置中，我们给出的条件下，即使使用灵活的机器学习方法用于估计滋扰参数，群体平均治疗效应的双重稳定估计值也是渐近的正常。我们说明了方法在半合成和现实世界数据集上的特性，并表明它与标准的荟萃分析技术相比。

Causal inference is the process of using assumptions, study designs, and estimation strategies to draw conclusions about the causal relationships between variables based on data. This allows researchers to better understand the underlying mechanisms at work in complex systems and make more informed decisions. In many settings, we may not fully observe all the confounders that affect both the treatment and outcome variables, complicating the estimation of causal effects. To address this problem, a growing literature in both causal inference and machine learning proposes to use Instrumental Variables (IV). This paper serves as the first effort to systematically and comprehensively introduce and discuss the IV methods and their applications in both causal inference and machine learning. First, we provide the formal definition of IVs and discuss the identification problem of IV regression methods under different assumptions. Second, we categorize the existing work on IV methods into three streams according to the focus on the proposed methods, including two-stage least squares with IVs, control function with IVs, and evaluation of IVs. For each stream, we present both the classical causal inference methods, and recent developments in the machine learning literature. Then, we introduce a variety of applications of IV methods in real-world scenarios and provide a summary of the available datasets and algorithms. Finally, we summarize the literature, discuss the open problems and suggest promising future research directions for IV methods and their applications. We also develop a toolkit of IVs methods reviewed in this survey at https://github.com/causal-machine-learning-lab/mliv.

了解特定待遇或政策与许多感兴趣领域有关的影响，从政治经济学，营销到医疗保健。在本文中，我们开发了一种非参数算法，用于在合成控制的背景下检测随着时间的流逝的治疗作用。该方法基于许多算法的反事实预测，而不必假设该算法正确捕获模型。我们介绍了一种推论程序来检测治疗效果，并表明测试程序对于固定，β混合过程渐近有效，而无需对所考虑的一组基础算法施加任何限制。我们讨论了平均治疗效果估计的一致性保证，并为提出的方法提供了遗憾的界限。算法类别可能包括随机森林，套索或任何其他机器学习估计器。数值研究和应用说明了该方法的优势。

In many investigations, the primary outcome of interest is difficult or expensive to collect. Examples include long-term health effects of medical interventions, measurements requiring expensive testing or follow-up, and outcomes only measurable on small panels as in marketing. This reduces effective sample sizes for estimating the average treatment effect (ATE). However, there is often an abundance of observations on surrogate outcomes not of primary interest, such as short-term health effects or online-ad click-through. We study the role of such surrogate observations in the efficient estimation of treatment effects. To quantify their value, we derive the semiparametric efficiency bounds on ATE estimation with and without the presence of surrogates and several intermediary settings. The difference between these characterizes the efficiency gains from optimally leveraging surrogates. We study two regimes: when the number of surrogate observations is comparable to primary-outcome observations and when the former dominates the latter. We take an agnostic missing-data approach circumventing strong surrogate conditions previously assumed. To leverage surrogates' efficiency gains, we develop efficient ATE estimation and inference based on flexible machine-learning estimates of nuisance functions appearing in the influence functions we derive. We empirically demonstrate the gains by studying the long-term earnings effect of job training.

Fingerprints are key tools in climate change detection and attribution (D&A) that are used to determine whether changes in observations are different from internal climate variability (detection), and whether observed changes can be assigned to specific external drivers (attribution). We propose a direct D&A approach based on supervised learning to extract fingerprints that lead to robust predictions under relevant interventions on exogenous variables, i.e., climate drivers other than the target. We employ anchor regression, a distributionally-robust statistical learning method inspired by causal inference that extrapolates well to perturbed data under the interventions considered. The residuals from the prediction achieve either uncorrelatedness or mean independence with the exogenous variables, thus guaranteeing robustness. We define D&A as a unified hypothesis testing framework that relies on the same statistical model but uses different targets and test statistics. In the experiments, we first show that the CO2 forcing can be robustly predicted from temperature spatial patterns under strong interventions on the solar forcing. Second, we illustrate attribution to the greenhouse gases and aerosols while protecting against interventions on the aerosols and CO2 forcing, respectively. Our study shows that incorporating robustness constraints against relevant interventions may significantly benefit detection and attribution of climate change.

基于Shapley值的功能归因在解释机器学习模型中很受欢迎。但是，从理论和计算的角度来看，它们的估计是复杂的。我们将这种复杂性分解为两个因素：（1）〜删除特征信息的方法，以及（2）〜可拖动估计策略。这两个因素提供了一种天然镜头，我们可以更好地理解和比较24种不同的算法。基于各种特征删除方法，我们描述了多种类型的Shapley值特征属性和计算每个类型的方法。然后，基于可进行的估计策略，我们表征了两个不同的方法家族：模型 - 不合时宜的和模型特定的近似值。对于模型 - 不合稳定的近似值，我们基准了广泛的估计方法，并将其与Shapley值的替代性但等效的特征联系起来。对于特定于模型的近似值，我们阐明了对每种方法的线性，树和深模型的障碍至关重要的假设。最后，我们确定了文献中的差距以及有希望的未来研究方向。

机器学习渗透到许多行业，这为公司带来了新的利益来源。然而，在人寿保险行业中，机器学习在实践中并未被广泛使用，因为在过去几年中，统计模型表明了它们的风险评估效率。因此，保险公司可能面临评估人工智能价值的困难。随着时间的流逝，专注于人寿保险行业的修改突出了将机器学习用于保险公司的利益以及通过释放数据价值带来的利益。本文回顾了传统的生存建模方法论，并通过机器学习技术扩展了它们。它指出了与常规机器学习模型的差异，并强调了特定实现在与机器学习模型家族中面对审查数据的重要性。在本文的补充中，已经开发了Python库。已经调整了不同的开源机器学习算法，以适应人寿保险数据的特殊性，即检查和截断。此类模型可以轻松地从该SCOR库中应用，以准确地模拟人寿保险风险。

Many scientific and engineering challenges-ranging from personalized medicine to customized marketing recommendations-require an understanding of treatment effect heterogeneity. In this paper, we develop a non-parametric causal forest for estimating heterogeneous treatment effects that extends Breiman's widely used random forest algorithm. In the potential outcomes framework with unconfoundedness, we show that causal forests are pointwise consistent for the true treatment effect, and have an asymptotically Gaussian and centered sampling distribution. We also discuss a practical method for constructing asymptotic confidence intervals for the true treatment effect that are centered at the causal forest estimates. Our theoretical results rely on a generic Gaussian theory for a large family of random forest algorithms. To our knowledge, this is the first set of results that allows any type of random forest, including classification and regression forests, to be used for provably valid statistical inference. In experiments, we find causal forests to be substantially more powerful than classical methods based on nearest-neighbor matching, especially in the presence of irrelevant covariates.

因果推断能够估计治疗效果（即，治疗结果的因果效果），使各个领域的决策受益。本研究中的一个基本挑战是观察数据的治疗偏见。为了提高对因果推断的观察研究的有效性，基于代表的方法作为最先进的方法表明了治疗效果估计的卓越性能。基于大多数基于表示的方法假设所有观察到的协变量都是预处理的（即，不受治疗影响的影响），并学习这些观察到的协变量的平衡表示，以估算治疗效果。不幸的是，这种假设往往在实践中往往是太严格的要求，因为一些协调因子是通过对治疗的干预进行改变（即，后治疗）来改变。相比之下，从不变的协变量中学到的平衡表示因此偏置治疗效果估计。