Jonas Peters

Felix Schur, Niklas Pfister, Peng Ding et al.

We study the problem of estimating causal effects under hidden confounding in the following unpaired data setting: we observe some covariates $X$ and an outcome $Y$ under different experimental conditions (environments) but do not observe them jointly; we either observe $X$ or $Y$. Under appropriate regularity conditions, the problem can be cast as an instrumental variable (IV) regression with the environment acting as a (possibly high-dimensional) instrument. When there are many environments but only a few observations per environment, standard two-sample IV estimators fail to be consistent. We propose a GMM-type estimator based on cross-fold sample splitting of the instrument-covariate sample and prove that it is consistent as the number of environments grows but the sample size per environment remains constant. We further extend the method to sparse causal effects via $\ell_1$-regularized estimation and post-selection refitting.

Linus Kühne, Felix Schur, Jonas Peters

We consider the following two-player game: using observational data, the leader chooses a prediction function for a response variable $Y$ from given covariates. The follower then reacts with an intervention on some covariates in the underlying structural causal model to maximize their own objective. The leader knows the intervention targets, but may have limited knowledge of the follower's objective. We call this setup a prediction-intervention game, a special case of a Stackelberg game. Finding an optimal strategy for the leader is generally difficult. To avoid severe performance loss, the leader may base their prediction on the causal parents of $Y$, or more generally on an invariant subset of covariates. We prove, for two common classes of follower objectives, that predictors based on the stable blanket, a specific invariant subset, are always better or as good as those based on the causal parents. We further upper bound the leader's post-intervention risk by a worst-case risk over allowed interventions and strengthen existing distribution generalization results to analyze this bound: we give sufficient conditions under which stable-blanket predictors are worst-case optimal, and show by examples that these conditions cannot in general be dropped. Finally, we discuss practical strategies for settings with known and unknown graph, and test them on simulated and real-world data.