Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Cross-Fitting and Averaging for Machine Learning Estimation of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects

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 2007.02852 v2 pith:THXTW63O submitted 2020-07-06 stat.ME

classification stat.ME
keywords differentaveragingcross-fittingdatameta-learnersperformanceestimatorslearning
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

We investigate the finite sample performance of sample splitting, cross-fitting and averaging for the estimation of the conditional average treatment effect. Recently proposed methods, so-called meta-learners, make use of machine learning to estimate different nuisance functions and hence allow for fewer restrictions on the underlying structure of the data. To limit a potential overfitting bias that may result when using machine learning methods, cross-fitting estimators have been proposed. This includes the splitting of the data in different folds to reduce bias and averaging over folds to restore efficiency. To the best of our knowledge, it is not yet clear how exactly the data should be split and averaged. We employ a Monte Carlo study with different data generation processes and consider twelve different estimators that vary in sample-splitting, cross-fitting and averaging procedures. We investigate the performance of each estimator independently on four different meta-learners: the doubly-robust-learner, R-learner, T-learner and X-learner. We find that the performance of all meta-learners heavily depends on the procedure of splitting and averaging. The best performance in terms of mean squared error (MSE) among the sample split estimators can be achieved when applying cross-fitting plus taking the median over multiple different sample-splitting iterations. Some meta-learners exhibit a high variance when the lasso is included in the ML methods. Excluding the lasso decreases the variance and leads to robust and at least competitive results.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Debiased Machine Learning for Partially Linear Accelerated Failure Time Models

    stat.ME 2026-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A debiased machine learning estimator for partially linear accelerated failure time models achieves valid inference on a target exposure under right censoring via an orthogonalized rank-based U-statistic and block-pai...

  2. Overview and practical recommendations on using Shapley Values for identifying predictive biomarkers via CATE modeling

    stat.ME 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Surrogate SHAP fits an XGBoost model to estimated CATEs and uses TreeSHAP to rank predictive biomarkers, with simulations favoring S-learning in RCTs and R/DR-learning in observational settings.

  3. Causal machine learning for heterogeneous treatment effects in the presence of missing outcome data

    stat.ML 2024-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    The authors extend the DR-learner and EP-learner to handle outcomes missing at random by adding inverse-probability-of-censoring weights, and show the resulting estimators are oracle efficient.

Pith tools