Kyunghyun Cho

Daniel Jiwoong Im, Kyunghyun Cho

This paper serves as a starting point for machine learning researchers, engineers and students who are interested in but not yet familiar with causal inference. We start by laying out an important set of assumptions that are collectively needed for causal identification, such as exchangeability, positivity, consistency and the absence of interference. From these assumptions, we build out a set of important causal inference techniques, which we do so by categorizing them into two buckets; active and passive approaches. We describe and discuss randomized controlled trials and bandit-based approaches from the active category. We then describe classical approaches, such as matching and inverse probability weighting, in the passive category, followed by more recent deep learning based algorithms. By finishing the paper with some of the missing aspects of causal inference from this paper, such as collider biases, we expect this paper to provide readers with a diverse set of starting points for further reading and research in causal inference and discovery.

Daniel Jiwoong Im, Kyunghyun Cho, Narges Razavian

Domain adaptation and covariate shift are big issues in deep learning and they ultimately affect any causal inference algorithms that rely on deep neural networks. Causal effect variational autoencoder (CEVAE) is trained to predict the outcome given observational treatment data and it suffers from the distribution shift at test time. In this paper, we introduce uniform treatment variational autoencoders (UTVAE) that are trained with uniform treatment distribution using importance sampling and show that using uniform treatment over observational treatment distribution leads to better causal inference by mitigating the distribution shift that occurs from training to test time. We also explore the combination of uniform and observational treatment distributions with inference and generative network training objectives to find a better training procedure for inferring treatment effects. Experimentally, we find that the proposed UTVAE yields better absolute average treatment effect error and precision in the estimation of heterogeneous effect error than the CEVAE on synthetic and IHDP datasets.