Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Off-Policy Evaluation with Policy-Dependent Optimization Response

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 2202.12958 v2 pith:BCBT4XBH submitted 2022-02-25 cs.LG

classification cs.LG
keywords optimizationtextitcausalevaluationpolicy-dependentpolicyaveragedecision-maker
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

The intersection of causal inference and machine learning for decision-making is rapidly expanding, but the default decision criterion remains an \textit{average} of individual causal outcomes across a population. In practice, various operational restrictions ensure that a decision-maker's utility is not realized as an \textit{average} but rather as an \textit{output} of a downstream decision-making problem (such as matching, assignment, network flow, minimizing predictive risk). In this work, we develop a new framework for off-policy evaluation with \textit{policy-dependent} linear optimization responses: causal outcomes introduce stochasticity in objective function coefficients. Under this framework, a decision-maker's utility depends on the policy-dependent optimization, which introduces a fundamental challenge of \textit{optimization} bias even for the case of policy evaluation. We construct unbiased estimators for the policy-dependent estimand by a perturbation method, and discuss asymptotic variance properties for a set of adjusted plug-in estimators. Lastly, attaining unbiased policy evaluation allows for policy optimization: we provide a general algorithm for optimizing causal interventions. We corroborate our theoretical results with numerical simulations.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. When Can You Trust Offline Evaluation of Equal-Cost Top-k Allocation? A Controlled, Reproducible Benchmark and Practitioner's Guide

    cs.LG 2026-08 accept novelty 5.5 of 10

    Offline evaluation of deterministic top-k allocation is trustworthy only under logger-target action alignment and credible propensities; nuisance-only cross-fitting worsens the optimizer's curse, and propensity-estima...

Pith tools