Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Integrating Nearest Neighbors with Neural Network Models for Treatment Effect Estimation

Published 11 May 2023 in stat.ML and cs.LG | (2305.06789v2)

Abstract: Treatment effect estimation is of high-importance for both researchers and practitioners across many scientific and industrial domains. The abundance of observational data makes them increasingly used by researchers for the estimation of causal effects. However, these data suffer from biases, from several weaknesses, leading to inaccurate causal effect estimations, if not handled properly. Therefore, several machine learning techniques have been proposed, most of them focusing on leveraging the predictive power of neural network models to attain more precise estimation of causal effects. In this work, we propose a new methodology, named Nearest Neighboring Information for Causal Inference (NNCI), for integrating valuable nearest neighboring information on neural network-based models for estimating treatment effects. The proposed NNCI methodology is applied to some of the most well established neural network-based models for treatment effect estimation with the use of observational data. Numerical experiments and analysis provide empirical and statistical evidence that the integration of NNCI with state-of-the-art neural network models leads to considerably improved treatment effect estimations on a variety of well-known challenging benchmarks.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (50)
  1. High-dimensional propensity score adjustment in studies of treatment effects using health care claims data. Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.), 20(4):512, 2009.
  2. Kuramoto model-based analysis reveals oxytocin effects on brain network dynamics. International Journal of Neural Systems, 32(02):2250002, 2022.
  3. Philip Oreopoulos. Estimating average and local average treatment effects of education when compulsory schooling laws really matter. American Economic Review, 96(1):152–175, 2006.
  4. Measuring multichannel advertising response. Management Science, 63(8):2706–2728, 2017.
  5. Causal inference. Engineering, 6(3):253–263, 2020.
  6. Causal inference with observational data: the need for triangulation of evidence. Psychological medicine, 51(4):563–578, 2021.
  7. Adapting neural networks for the estimation of treatment effects. Advances in neural information processing systems, 32, 2019.
  8. Estimating individual treatment effect: Generalization bounds and algorithms. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning - Volume 70, ICML’17, page 3076–3085, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 2017. JMLR.org.
  9. Benchmarking optimization software with performance profiles. Mathematical programming, 91(2):201–213, 2002.
  10. Helmut Finner. On a monotonicity problem in step-down multiple test procedures. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88(423):920–923, 1993.
  11. Rank methods for combination of independent experiments in analysis of variance. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 33(2):482–497, 1962.
  12. GANITE: estimation of individualized treatment effects using generative adversarial nets. In 6th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2018, Vancouver, BC, Canada, April 30 - May 3, 2018, Conference Track Proceedings. OpenReview.net, 2018. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=ByKWUeWA-.
  13. Metalearners for estimating heterogeneous treatment effects using machine learning. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 116(10):4156–4165, 2019.
  14. BART: bayesian additive regression trees. The Annals of Applied Statistics, 4(1):266–298, 2010.
  15. Leo Breiman. Random forests. Machine learning, 45(1):5–32, 2001.
  16. Estimation and inference of heterogeneous treatment effects using random forests. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 113(523):1228–1242, 2018.
  17. Causal effect inference with deep latent-variable models. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017.
  18. A kernel two-sample test. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 13(1):723–773, 2012.
  19. Cédric Villani. Optimal transport: old and new, volume 338. Springer, 2009.
  20. An improved neural network model for treatment effect estimation. In IFIP International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Applications and Innovations, pages 147–158. Springer, 2022a.
  21. Jennifer L Hill. Bayesian nonparametric modeling for causal inference. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 20(1):217–240, 2011.
  22. Representation learning for treatment effect estimation from observational data. Advances in neural information processing systems, 31, 2018.
  23. Learning representations for counterfactual inference. In Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on International Conference on Machine Learning - Volume 48, ICML’16, page 3020–3029. JMLR.org, 2016.
  24. Donald B Rubin. Causal inference using potential outcomes: Design, modeling, decisions. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100(469):322–331, 2005.
  25. An evaluation framework for comparing causal inference models. In Proceedings of the 12th Hellenic Conference on Artificial Intelligence, SETN ’22, Corfu, Greece, 2022b. Association for Computing Machinery. ISBN 9781450395977. doi:10.1145/3549737.3549775. URL https://doi.org/10.1145/3549737.3549775.
  26. Ioannis E Livieris. Improving the classification efficiency of an ann utilizing a new training methodology. In Informatics, volume 6, page 1. MDPI, 2018.
  27. An advanced deep learning model for short-term forecasting U.S. natural gas price and movement. In Ilias Maglogiannis, Lazaros Iliadis, and Elias Pimenidis, editors, Artificial Intelligence Applications and Innovations. AIAI 2020 IFIP WG 12.5 International Workshops, pages 165–176, Cham, 2020. Springer International Publishing. ISBN 978-3-030-49190-1.
  28. A pareto-based ensemble with feature and instance selection for learning from multi-class imbalanced datasets. International Journal of Neural Systems, 27(06):1750028, 2017.
  29. Employing constrained neural networks for forecasting new product’s sales increase. In Artificial Intelligence Applications and Innovations, pages 161–172. Springer, 2019.
  30. An improved weight-constrained neural network training algorithm. Neural Computing and Applications, 32:4177–4185, 2020.
  31. Improved overlap-based undersampling for imbalanced dataset classification with application to epilepsy and Parkinson’s disease. International Journal of Neural Systems, 30(08):2050043, 2020.
  32. Prediction of students’ graduation time using a two-level classification algorithm. In Technology and Innovation in Learning, Teaching and Education: First International Conference, TECH-EDU 2018, Thessaloniki, Greece, June 20–22, 2018, Revised Selected Papers 1, pages 553–565. Springer, 2019.
  33. Vincent Dorie. NPCI: Non-parametrics for causal inference. URL https://github.com/vdorie/npci.
  34. Benchmarking framework for performance-evaluation of causal inference analysis. CoRR, abs/1802.05046, 2018. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1802.05046.
  35. Infant mortality statistics from the linked birth/infant death data set–1995 period data. 46(6 Suppl 2):1–22, 1998.
  36. Deep learning with Keras. Packt Publishing Ltd, 2017.
  37. A comparative study on distance measuring approaches for clustering. International Journal of Research in Computer Science, 2(1):29–31, 2011.
  38. k𝑘kitalic_k-means with three different distance metrics. International Journal of Computer Applications, 67(10), 2013.
  39. A dynamic ensemble learning algorithm for neural networks. Neural Computing and Applications, 32:8675–8690, 2020.
  40. Special issue on ensemble learning and applications. Algorithms, 13(6):140, 2020.
  41. Reward-penalty weighted ensemble for emotion state classification from multi-modal data streams. International journal of neural systems, pages 2250049–2250049, 2022.
  42. Ensembles of deep learning architectures for the early diagnosis of the Alzheimer’s disease. International journal of neural systems, 26(07):1650025, 2016.
  43. JP Amezquita-Sancheza and M Valtierra-Rodriguez. Machine learning in structural engineering. Scientia Iranica, 27(6):2645–2656, 2020.
  44. FEMa: A finite element machine for fast learning. Neural Computing and Applications, 32:6393–6404, 2020.
  45. Self-supervised learning for electroencephalography. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, pages 1–15, 2022. doi:10.1109/TNNLS.2022.3190448.
  46. Uncertainty-guided voxel-level supervised contrastive learning for semi-supervised medical image segmentation. International Journal of Neural Systems, 32(04):2250016, 2022.
  47. Epileptic seizure prediction using deep transformer model. International journal of neural systems, 32(02):2150058, 2022.
  48. On the tuning of the computation capability of spiking neural membrane systems with communication on request. International Journal of Neural Systems, 32(8):2250037–2250037, 2022.
  49. Enzymatic numerical spiking neural membrane systems and their application in designing membrane controllers. International Journal of Neural Systems, pages 2250055–2250055, 2022a.
  50. A layered spiking neural system for classification problems. International journal of neural systems, 32(08):2250023, 2022b.
Citations (3)

Summary

Paper to Video (Beta)

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Authors (2)

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 24 tweets with 0 likes about this paper.