Showing 1–2 of 2 results for author: Dorie, V

Atlantic Causal Inference Conference (ACIC) Data Analysis Challenge 2017

Authors: P. Richard Hahn, Vincent Dorie, Jared S. Murray

Abstract: This brief note documents the data generating processes used in the 2017 Data Analysis Challenge associated with the Atlantic Causal Inference Conference (ACIC). The focus of the challenge was estimation and inference for conditional average treatment effects (CATEs) in the presence of targeted selection, which leads to strong confounding. The associated data files and further plots can be found o… ▽ More This brief note documents the data generating processes used in the 2017 Data Analysis Challenge associated with the Atlantic Causal Inference Conference (ACIC). The focus of the challenge was estimation and inference for conditional average treatment effects (CATEs) in the presence of targeted selection, which leads to strong confounding. The associated data files and further plots can be found on the first author's web page. △ Less

Submitted 23 May, 2019; originally announced May 2019.

Automated versus do-it-yourself methods for causal inference: Lessons learned from a data analysis competition

Authors: Vincent Dorie, Jennifer Hill, Uri Shalit, Marc Scott, Dan Cervone

Abstract: Statisticians have made great progress in creating methods that reduce our reliance on parametric assumptions. However this explosion in research has resulted in a breadth of inferential strategies that both create opportunities for more reliable inference as well as complicate the choices that an applied researcher has to make and defend. Relatedly, researchers advocating for new methods typicall… ▽ More Statisticians have made great progress in creating methods that reduce our reliance on parametric assumptions. However this explosion in research has resulted in a breadth of inferential strategies that both create opportunities for more reliable inference as well as complicate the choices that an applied researcher has to make and defend. Relatedly, researchers advocating for new methods typically compare their method to at best 2 or 3 other causal inference strategies and test using simulations that may or may not be designed to equally tease out flaws in all the competing methods. The causal inference data analysis challenge, "Is Your SATT Where It's At?", launched as part of the 2016 Atlantic Causal Inference Conference, sought to make progress with respect to both of these issues. The researchers creating the data testing grounds were distinct from the researchers submitting methods whose efficacy would be evaluated. Results from 30 competitors across the two versions of the competition (black box algorithms and do-it-yourself analyses) are presented along with post-hoc analyses that reveal information about the characteristics of causal inference strategies and settings that affect performance. The most consistent conclusion was that methods that flexibly model the response surface perform better overall than methods that fail to do so. Finally new methods are proposed that combine features of several of the top-performing submitted methods. △ Less

Submitted 20 July, 2018; v1 submitted 9 July, 2017; originally announced July 2017.