Alireza Zamanian

A. Zamanian, L. Mareis, N. Ahmidi

Simulation studies play a key role in the validation of causal inference methods. The simulation results are reliable only if the study is designed according to the promised operational conditions of the method-in-test. Still, many causal inference literature tend to design over-restricted or misspecified studies. In this paper, we elaborate on the problem of improper simulation design for causal methods and compile a list of desiderata for an effective simulation framework. We then introduce partially randomized causal simulation (PARCS), a simulation framework that meets those desiderata. PARCS synthesizes data based on graphical causal models and a wide range of adjustable parameters. There is a legible mapping from usual causal assumptions to the parameters, thus, users can identify and specify the subset of related parameters and randomize the remaining ones to generate a range of complying data-generating processes for their causal method. The result is a more comprehensive and inclusive empirical investigation for causal claims. Using PARCS, we reproduce and extend the simulation studies of two well-known causal discovery and missing data analysis papers to emphasize the necessity of a proper simulation design. Our results show that those papers would have improved and extended the findings, had they used PARCS for simulation. The framework is implemented as a Python package, too. By discussing the comprehensiveness and transparency of PARCS, we encourage causal inference researchers to utilize it as a standard tool for future works.

Henrik von Kleist, Alireza Zamanian, Ilya Shpitser et al.

Active feature acquisition (AFA) agents, crucial in domains like healthcare where acquiring features is often costly or harmful, determine the optimal set of features for a subsequent classification task. As deploying an AFA agent introduces a shift in missingness distribution, it's vital to assess its expected performance at deployment using retrospective data. In a companion paper, we introduce a semi-offline reinforcement learning (RL) framework for active feature acquisition performance evaluation (AFAPE) where features are assumed to be time-dependent. Here, we study and extend the AFAPE problem to cover static feature settings, where features are time-invariant, and hence provide more flexibility to the AFA agents in deciding the order of the acquisitions. In this static feature setting, we derive and adapt new inverse probability weighting (IPW), direct method (DM), and double reinforcement learning (DRL) estimators within the semi-offline RL framework. These estimators can be applied when the missingness in the retrospective dataset follows a missing-at-random (MAR) pattern. They also can be applied to missing-not-at-random (MNAR) patterns in conjunction with appropriate existing missing data techniques. We illustrate the improved data efficiency offered by the semi-offline RL estimators in synthetic and real-world data experiments under synthetic MAR and MNAR missingness.

Patrick Rockenschaub, Zhicong Xian, Alireza Zamanian et al.

Prediction becomes more challenging with missing covariates. What method is chosen to handle missingness can greatly affect how models perform. In many real-world problems, the best prediction performance is achieved by models that can leverage the informative nature of a value being missing. Yet, the reasons why a covariate goes missing can change once a model is deployed in practice. If such a missingness shift occurs, the conditional probability of a value being missing differs in the target data. Prediction performance in the source data may no longer be a good selection criterion, and approaches that do not rely on informative missingness may be preferable. However, we show that the Bayes predictor remains unchanged by ignorable shifts for which the probability of missingness only depends on observed data. Any consistent estimator of the Bayes predictor may therefore result in robust prediction under those conditions, although we show empirically that different methods appear robust to different types of shifts. If the missingness shift is non-ignorable, the Bayes predictor may change due to the shift. While neither approach recovers the Bayes predictor in this case, we found empirically that disregarding missingness was most beneficial when it was highly informative.