Andre F. Ribeiro

Andre F. Ribeiro

The widely used 'Counterfactual' definition of Causal Effects was derived for unbiasedness and accuracy - and not generalizability. We propose a Combinatorial definition for the External Validity (EV) of intervention effects. We first define the concept of an effect observation 'background'. We then formulate conditions for effect generalization based on samples' sets of (observed and unobserved) backgrounds. This reveals two limits for effect generalization: (1) when effects of a variable are observed under all their enumerable backgrounds, or, (2) when backgrounds have become sufficiently randomized. We use the resulting combinatorial framework to re-examine several issues in the original counterfactual formulation: out-of-sample validity, concurrent estimation of multiple effects, bias-variance tradeoffs, statistical power, and connections to current predictive and explaining techniques. Methodologically, the definitions also allow us to replace the parametric estimation problems that followed the counterfactual definition by combinatorial enumeration and randomization problems in non-experimental samples. We use the resulting non-parametric framework to demonstrate (External Validity, Unconfoundness and Precision) tradeoffs in the performance of popular supervised, explaining, and causal-effect estimators. We also illustrate how the approach allows for the use of supervised and explaining methods in non-i.i.d. samples. The COVID19 pandemic highlighted the need for learning solutions to provide predictions in severally incomplete samples. We demonstrate applications in this pressing problem.

Andre F. Ribeiro, Frank Neffke, Ricardo Hausmann

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...