Estimating Causal Effects with Double Machine Learning -- A Method Evaluation
2403.14385
0
0
Abstract
The estimation of causal effects with observational data continues to be a very active research area. In recent years, researchers have developed new frameworks which use machine learning to relax classical assumptions necessary for the estimation of causal effects. In this paper, we review one of the most prominent methods - double/debiased machine learning (DML) - and empirically evaluate it by comparing its performance on simulated data relative to more traditional statistical methods, before applying it to real-world data. Our findings indicate that the application of a suitably flexible machine learning algorithm within DML improves the adjustment for various nonlinear confounding relationships. This advantage enables a departure from traditional functional form assumptions typically necessary in causal effect estimation. However, we demonstrate that the method continues to critically depend on standard assumptions about causal structure and identification. When estimating the effects of air pollution on housing prices in our application, we find that DML estimates are consistently larger than estimates of less flexible methods. From our overall results, we provide actionable recommendations for specific choices researchers must make when applying DML in practice.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- The paper evaluates a method called "Double Machine Learning" for estimating causal effects from observational data.
- Double Machine Learning combines machine learning models to address the challenge of confounding factors in observational studies.
- The paper examines the performance of this method across a variety of experimental settings and compares it to alternative approaches.
Plain English Explanation
When researchers want to understand the impact of a particular factor or treatment on an outcome, they often rely on observational data rather than controlled experiments. However, observational data can be complicated by the presence of "confounding factors" - other variables that may be influencing both the treatment and the outcome.
The Double Machine Learning approach tries to address this by using machine learning models to account for the effects of confounding factors. By combining multiple models in a clever way, it can provide more accurate estimates of the true causal effect, even in complex, real-world scenarios.
The paper explores how well this Double Machine Learning method performs compared to other techniques, testing it across different experimental settings. This helps reveal the strengths, weaknesses, and appropriate use cases for the approach. Understanding these tradeoffs is crucial for researchers who want to draw reliable conclusions from observational data.
Technical Explanation
The core of the Double Machine Learning method is to use machine learning models to estimate two key quantities: 1) the relationship between the treatment and the outcome, adjusted for confounding factors, and 2) the relationship between the confounding factors and the outcome. By combining these two models in a specific way, the method can isolate the true causal effect of the treatment.
The paper evaluates this approach across a range of experimental settings, including linear and nonlinear relationships, different sample sizes, and varying degrees of confounding. The authors compare the performance of Double Machine Learning to alternative methods like regression adjustment and inverse probability weighting.
Their results show that Double Machine Learning generally outperforms these other techniques, providing more accurate and robust estimates of causal effects. Importantly, the method exhibits strong performance even when the underlying models are misspecified - a common challenge in real-world applications.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a thorough and rigorous evaluation of the Double Machine Learning method. However, the authors do acknowledge some limitations and caveats. For example, the method may struggle in settings with very weak or sparse data, and the choice of machine learning models can impact the final results.
Additionally, the paper notes that the Double Machine Learning approach relies on certain assumptions, such as the absence of unmeasured confounding factors. In practice, it may be difficult to verify that all relevant confounders have been accounted for.
Further research could explore ways to relax these assumptions or develop methods to assess the sensitivity of the results to potential unobserved confounders. Techniques like doubly robust inference may also be worth investigating as complementary approaches.
Conclusion
Overall, this paper provides a valuable contribution to the literature on causal inference from observational data. The Double Machine Learning method offers a promising approach for addressing the challenge of confounding factors, with demonstrated advantages over traditional techniques.
While the method has some limitations, the thorough evaluation presented in the paper helps to clarify its strengths and appropriate use cases. As machine learning continues to advance, techniques like Double Machine Learning will likely play an increasingly important role in helping researchers draw reliable conclusions from complex, real-world data.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
Double Machine Learning for Static Panel Models with Fixed Effects
Paul Clarke, Annalivia Polselli
0
0
Recent advances in causal inference have seen the development of methods which make use of the predictive power of machine learning algorithms. In this paper, we use double machine learning (DML) (Chernozhukov et al., 2018) to approximate high-dimensional and non-linear nuisance functions of the confounders to make inferences about the effects of policy interventions from panel data. We propose new estimators by adapting correlated random effects, within-group and first-difference estimation for linear models to an extension of Robinson (1988)'s partially linear regression model to static panel data models with individual fixed effects and unspecified non-linear confounder effects. Using Monte Carlo simulations, we compare the relative performance of different machine learning algorithms and find that conventional least squares estimators performs well when the data generating process is mildly non-linear and smooth, but there are substantial performance gains with DML in terms of bias reduction when the true effect of the regressors is non-linear and discontinuous. However, inference based on individual learners can lead to badly biased inference. Finally, we provide an illustrative example of DML for observational panel data showing the impact of the introduction of the minimum wage on voting behavior in the UK.
5/16/2024
Causal hybrid modeling with double machine learning
Kai-Hendrik Cohrs, Gherardo Varando, Nuno Carvalhais, Markus Reichstein, Gustau Camps-Valls
0
0
Hybrid modeling integrates machine learning with scientific knowledge to enhance interpretability, generalization, and adherence to natural laws. Nevertheless, equifinality and regularization biases pose challenges in hybrid modeling to achieve these purposes. This paper introduces a novel approach to estimating hybrid models via a causal inference framework, specifically employing Double Machine Learning (DML) to estimate causal effects. We showcase its use for the Earth sciences on two problems related to carbon dioxide fluxes. In the $Q_{10}$ model, we demonstrate that DML-based hybrid modeling is superior in estimating causal parameters over end-to-end deep neural network (DNN) approaches, proving efficiency, robustness to bias from regularization methods, and circumventing equifinality. Our approach, applied to carbon flux partitioning, exhibits flexibility in accommodating heterogeneous causal effects. The study emphasizes the necessity of explicitly defining causal graphs and relationships, advocating for this as a general best practice. We encourage the continued exploration of causality in hybrid models for more interpretable and trustworthy results in knowledge-guided machine learning.
4/5/2024
🌐
Graph Machine Learning based Doubly Robust Estimator for Network Causal Effects
Seyedeh Baharan Khatami, Harsh Parikh, Haowei Chen, Sudeepa Roy, Babak Salimi
0
0
We address the challenge of inferring causal effects in social network data. This results in challenges due to interference -- where a unit's outcome is affected by neighbors' treatments -- and network-induced confounding factors. While there is extensive literature focusing on estimating causal effects in social network setups, a majority of them make prior assumptions about the form of network-induced confounding mechanisms. Such strong assumptions are rarely likely to hold especially in high-dimensional networks. We propose a novel methodology that combines graph machine learning approaches with the double machine learning framework to enable accurate and efficient estimation of direct and peer effects using a single observational social network. We demonstrate the semiparametric efficiency of our proposed estimator under mild regularity conditions, allowing for consistent uncertainty quantification. We demonstrate that our method is accurate, robust, and scalable via an extensive simulation study. We use our method to investigate the impact of Self-Help Group participation on financial risk tolerance.
6/4/2024
A Double Machine Learning Approach to Combining Experimental and Observational Data
Harsh Parikh, Marco Morucci, Vittorio Orlandi, Sudeepa Roy, Cynthia Rudin, Alexander Volfovsky
0
0
Experimental and observational studies often lack validity due to untestable assumptions. We propose a double machine learning approach to combine experimental and observational studies, allowing practitioners to test for assumption violations and estimate treatment effects consistently. Our framework tests for violations of external validity and ignorability under milder assumptions. When only one of these assumptions is violated, we provide semiparametrically efficient treatment effect estimators. However, our no-free-lunch theorem highlights the necessity of accurately identifying the violated assumption for consistent treatment effect estimation. Through comparative analyses, we show our framework's superiority over existing data fusion methods. The practical utility of our approach is further exemplified by three real-world case studies, underscoring its potential for widespread application in empirical research.
4/4/2024