Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
149 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Answering Causal Queries at Layer 3 with DiscoSCMs-Embracing Heterogeneity (2309.09323v3)

Published 17 Sep 2023 in cs.AI, cs.LG, and stat.ME

Abstract: In the realm of causal inference, Potential Outcomes (PO) and Structural Causal Models (SCM) are recognized as the principal frameworks.However, when it comes to Layer 3 valuations -- counterfactual queries deeply entwined with individual-level semantics -- both frameworks encounter limitations due to the degenerative issues brought forth by the consistency rule. This paper advocates for the Distribution-consistency Structural Causal Models (DiscoSCM) framework as a pioneering approach to counterfactual inference, skillfully integrating the strengths of both PO and SCM. The DiscoSCM framework distinctively incorporates a unit selection variable $U$ and embraces the concept of uncontrollable exogenous noise realization. Through personalized incentive scenarios, we demonstrate the inadequacies of PO and SCM frameworks in representing the probability of a user being a complier (a Layer 3 event) without degeneration, an issue adeptly resolved by adopting the assumption of independent counterfactual noises within DiscoSCM. This innovative assumption broadens the foundational counterfactual theory, facilitating the extension of numerous theoretical results regarding the probability of causation to an individual granularity level and leading to a comprehensive set of theories on heterogeneous counterfactual bounds. Ultimately, our paper posits that if one acknowledges and wishes to leverage the ubiquitous heterogeneity, understanding causality as invariance across heterogeneous units, then DiscoSCM stands as a significant advancement in the methodology of counterfactual inference.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (25)
  1. LBCF: A Large-Scale Budget-Constrained Causal Forest Algorithm. In Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022. 2310–2319.
  2. Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. Journal of the American statistical Association 91, 434 (1996), 444–455.
  3. On Pearl’s hierarchy and the foundations of causal inference. In Probabilistic and causal inference: the works of judea pearl. 507–556.
  4. Stephen R Cole and Constantine E Frangakis. 2009. The consistency statement in causal inference: a definition or an assumption? Epidemiology 20, 1 (2009), 3–5.
  5. A Philip Dawid and Stephen Senn. 2023. Personalised Decision-Making without Counterfactuals. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.11976 (2023).
  6. A large scale benchmark for uplift modeling. In KDD.
  7. Sara Geneletti and A Philip Dawid. 2011. Defining and identifying the effect of treatment on the treated. na.
  8. Free Lunch! Retrospective Uplift Modeling for Dynamic Promotions Recommendation within ROI Constraints. In Fourteenth ACM Conference on Recommender Systems. 486–491.
  9. Distribution-consistency Structural Causal Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.15911 (2024).
  10. Pierre Gutierrez and Jean-Yves Gérardy. 2017. Causal inference and uplift modelling: A review of the literature. In International conference on predictive applications and APIs. PMLR, 1–13.
  11. Paul W Holland. 1986. Statistics and causal inference. Journal of the American statistical Association 81, 396 (1986), 945–960.
  12. Yimin Huang and Marco Valtorta. 2012. Pearl’s calculus of intervention is complete. arXiv preprint arXiv:1206.6831 (2012).
  13. Guido W Imbens and Donald B Rubin. 2015. Causal inference in statistics, social, and biomedical sciences. Cambridge University Press.
  14. Unit selection: Learning benefit function from finite population data. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.08203 (2022).
  15. Ang Li and Judea Pearl. 2019a. Unit selection based on counterfactual logic. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
  16. Ang Li and Judea Pearl. 2019b. Unit selection based on counterfactual logic. In Proceedings of the 28th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Press, 1793–1799.
  17. S Mueller and J Pearl. 2023. Personalized decision making–A conceptual introduction. Journal of Causal Inference 11, 1 (2023), 20220050.
  18. Jerzy Neyman. 1923. On the application of probability theory to agricultural experiments. Essay on principles. Section 9. Roczniki Nauk Rolniczych 10 (1923), 1–51. English translation by D. M. Dabrowska and T. P. Speed in Statistical Science, 1990, 9, 465–480.
  19. Judea Pearl. 1995. Causal diagrams for empirical research. Biometrika 82, 4 (1995), 669–688.
  20. Judea Pearl. 1999. Probabilities of Causation: Three Counterfactual Interpretations and their identification. Synthese 121 (1999), 93–149. https://ftp.cs.ucla.edu/pub/stat_ser/r260-reprint.pdf
  21. Judea Pearl. 2009. Causality (Second ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  22. J Pearl. 2011. On the Consistency Rule in Causal Inference: Axiom, Definition, Assumption, or Theorem?(vol 21, pg 872, 2010). Epidemiology 22, 2 (2011), 285–285.
  23. Donald B Rubin. 1974. Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of educational Psychology 66, 5 (1974), 688.
  24. Jin Tian and Judea Pearl. 2000. Probabilities of causation: Bounds and identification. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 28, 1-4 (2000), 287–313. http://ftp.cs.ucla.edu/pub/stat_ser/r271-A.pdf
  25. A unified survey of treatment effect heterogeneity modelling and uplift modelling. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 54, 8 (2021), 1–36.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now