Estimating Treatment Effects under Algorithmic Interference: A Structured Neural Networks Approach
算法干扰下的治疗效应估计:结构化神经网络方法AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要研究随机实验中的总体治疗效应,并明确指出竞争者处理状态通过曝光竞争影响结局,直接对应因果推断和干扰方向。
算法干扰下的治疗效应估计:结构化神经网络方法AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Online user-generated content platforms allocate billions of dollars of promotional traffic through algorithms in two-sided marketplaces. To evaluate updates to these algorithms, platforms frequently rely on creator-side randomized experiments. However, because treated and control creators compete for exposure, such experiments suffer from algorithmic interference: exposure outcomes depend on competitors' treatment status. We show that commonly used difference-in-means estimators can therefore be severely biased and may even recommend deploying inferior algorithms. To address this challenge, we develop a structured semiparametric framework that explicitly models the competitive allocation mechanism underlying exposure. Our approach combines an algorithm choice model that characterizes how exposure is allocated across competing content with a viewer response model that captures engagement conditional on exposure. We construct a debiased estimator grounded in the double machine learning framework to recover the global treatment effect of platform-wide rollout. Methodologically, we extend DML asymptotic theory to accommodate correlated samples arising from overlapping consideration sets. Using Monte Carlo simulations and a large-scale field experiment on a major short-video platform, we show that our estimator closely matches an interference-free benchmark obtained from a costly double-sided experimental design. In contrast, standard estimators exhibit substantial bias and, in some cases, even reverse the sign of the effect.