Distribution-consistency Structural Causal Models (2401.15911v3)
Abstract: In the field of causal modeling, potential outcomes (PO) and structural causal models (SCMs) stand as the predominant frameworks. However, these frameworks face notable challenges in practically modeling counterfactuals, formalized as parameters of the joint distribution of potential outcomes. Counterfactual reasoning holds paramount importance in contemporary decision-making processes, especially in scenarios that demand personalized incentives based on the joint values of $(Y(0), Y(1))$. This paper begins with an investigation of the PO and SCM frameworks for modeling counterfactuals. Through the analysis, we identify an inherent model capacity limitation, termed as the degenerative counterfactual problem'', emerging from the consistency rule that is the cornerstone of both frameworks. To address this limitation, we introduce a novel \textit{distribution-consistency} assumption, and in alignment with it, we propose the Distribution-consistency Structural Causal Models (DiscoSCMs) offering enhanced capabilities to model counterfactuals. To concretely reveal the enhanced model capacity, we introduce a new identifiable causal parameter, \textit{the probability of consistency}, which holds practical significance within DiscoSCM alone, showcased with a personalized incentive example. Furthermore, we provide a comprehensive set of theoretical results about theLadder of Causation'' within the DiscoSCM framework. We hope it opens new avenues for future research of counterfactual modeling, ultimately enhancing our understanding of causality and its real-world applications.
- Lbcf: A large-scale budget-constrained causal forest algorithm. In Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022, pages 2310–2319, 2022.
- J Angrist. G. imbens, and d. rubin (1996). Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91(434):444–455.
- Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. Journal of the American statistical Association, 91(434):444–455, 1996.
- Bounds on treatment effects from studies with imperfect compliance. Journal of the American statistical Association, pages 1171–1176, 1997.
- On pearl’s hierarchy and the foundations of causal inference. In Probabilistic and causal inference: the works of judea pearl, pages 507–556. 2022.
- GE Box. All models are wrong, but some are useful. Robustness in Statistics, 202(1979):549, 1979.
- Criteria for surrogate end points. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology, 69(5):919–932, 2007.
- The consistency statement in causal inference: a definition or an assumption? Epidemiology, 20(1):3–5, 2009.
- Personalised decision-making without counterfactuals. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.11976, 2023.
- A large scale benchmark for uplift modeling. In KDD, 2018.
- Defining and identifying the effect of treatment on the treated. na, 2011.
- Free lunch! retrospective uplift modeling for dynamic promotions recommendation within roi constraints. In Fourteenth ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, pages 486–491, 2020.
- Causal inference and uplift modelling: A review of the literature. In International conference on predictive applications and APIs, pages 1–13. PMLR, 2017.
- Paul W Holland. Statistics and causal inference. Journal of the American statistical Association, 81(396):945–960, 1986.
- Pearl’s calculus of intervention is complete. arXiv preprint arXiv:1206.6831, 2012.
- Guido W Imbens. Potential outcome and directed acyclic graph approaches to causality: Relevance for empirical practice in economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 58(4):1129–1179, 2020.
- Causal inference in statistics, social, and biomedical sciences. Cambridge University Press, 2015.
- Unit selection based on counterfactual logic. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2019.
- Unit selection with causal diagram. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 36, pages 5765–5772, 2022.
- Keith A Markus. Causal effects and counterfactual conditionals: contrasting rubin, lewis and pearl. Economics & Philosophy, 37(3):441–461, 2021.
- S Mueller and J Pearl. Personalized decision making–a conceptual introduction. Journal of Causal Inference, 11(1):20220050, 2023a.
- Perspective on ‘harm’in personalized medicine–an alternative perspective. 2023b.
- Brady Neal. Introduction to causal inference. Course Lecture Notes (draft), 2020.
- Jerzy Neyman. On the application of probability theory to agricultural experiments. essay on principles. section 9. Roczniki Nauk Rolniczych, 10:1–51, 1923. English translation by D. M. Dabrowska and T. P. Speed in Statistical Science, 1990, 9, 465–480.
- J Pearl. On the consistency rule in causal inference: Axiom, definition, assumption, or theorem?(vol 21, pg 872, 2010). Epidemiology, 22(2):285–285, 2011.
- Judea Pearl. Causal diagrams for empirical research. Biometrika, 82(4):669–688, 1995.
- Judea Pearl. Causality. Cambridge university press, 2009.
- Judea Pearl. The seven tools of causal inference, with reflections on machine learning. Communications of the ACM, 62(3):54–60, 2019.
- Judea Pearl. 7.1 causal and counterfactual inference. The handbook of rationality, page 427, 2021.
- Judea Pearl. Direct and indirect effects. In Probabilistic and causal inference: the works of Judea Pearl, pages 373–392. 2022.
- Single world intervention graphs (swigs): A unification of the counterfactual and graphical approaches to causality. Center for the Statistics and the Social Sciences, University of Washington Series. Working Paper, 128(30):2013, 2013.
- Donald B Rubin. Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of educational Psychology, 66(5):688, 1974.
- Perspectives on harm in personalized medicine. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.01371, 2023.
- Customer churn prediction by hybrid neural networks. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(10):12547–12553, 2009.
- Tyler J VanderWeele. Concerning the consistency assumption in causal inference. Epidemiology, 20(6):880–883, 2009.
- Naftali Weinberger. Comparing rubin and pearl’s causal modelling frameworks: a commentary on markus (2021). Economics & Philosophy, 39(3):485–493, 2023.
- A unified survey of treatment effect heterogeneity modelling and uplift modelling. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 54(8):1–36, 2021.
- Uplift modeling for multiple treatments with cost optimization. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA), pages 422–431. IEEE, 2019.