Pith. sign in

REVIEW

An Automated Approach to Causal Inference in Discrete Settings

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2109.13471 v1 pith:YQVIE42J submitted 2021-09-28 stat.ME cs.LGstat.COstat.ML

An Automated Approach to Causal Inference in Discrete Settings

classification stat.ME cs.LGstat.COstat.ML
keywords causalalgorithmdiscreteanalyticallyapproachautomatedboundsdata
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

When causal quantities cannot be point identified, researchers often pursue partial identification to quantify the range of possible values. However, the peculiarities of applied research conditions can make this analytically intractable. We present a general and automated approach to causal inference in discrete settings. We show causal questions with discrete data reduce to polynomial programming problems, and we present an algorithm to automatically bound causal effects using efficient dual relaxation and spatial branch-and-bound techniques. The user declares an estimand, states assumptions, and provides data (however incomplete or mismeasured). The algorithm then searches over admissible data-generating processes and outputs the most precise possible range consistent with available information -- i.e., sharp bounds -- including a point-identified solution if one exists. Because this search can be computationally intensive, our procedure reports and continually refines non-sharp ranges that are guaranteed to contain the truth at all times, even when the algorithm is not run to completion. Moreover, it offers an additional guarantee we refer to as $\epsilon$-sharpness, characterizing the worst-case looseness of the incomplete bounds. Analytically validated simulations show the algorithm accommodates classic obstacles, including confounding, selection, measurement error, noncompliance, and nonresponse.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.