跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

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。

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。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要以平均处理效应估计作为明确应用,比较因果估计方法的偏差与覆盖率,因此支持因果推断分类。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Susan Athey
Guido W. Imbens
Jonas Metzger
Evan Munro

利用 Wasserstein 生成对抗网络设计蒙特卡洛模拟

研究问题
研究如何减少研究者选择蒙特卡洛设计的自由度,并以接近真实数据的模拟样本评价估计偏差和置信区间覆盖率。
方法与思路
作者建议用 GAN 系统生成模仿已有数据的人工样本,以实际数据约束模拟设计,并用 Wasserstein GAN 展示平均处理效应估计比较。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称,生成数据接近实际数据,三个示例情形中不存在始终最优的估计量;系统模拟可帮助针对具体环境选择方法。
阅读关注点
应核对生成模型如何设定已知处理效应、保留哪些数据特征,训练和验证如何进行,以及比较规则能否真正限制设计自由度。
阅读边界
仅依据所给出版社摘要,不能认定分布相似就保证因果结构真实,也无法判断 GAN 训练误差、方法选择偏差或结论的外部适用性。

原文摘要

When researchers develop new econometric methods it is common practice to compare the performance of the new methods to those of existing methods in Monte Carlo studies. The credibility of such Monte Carlo studies is often limited because of the discretion the researcher has in choosing the Monte Carlo designs reported. To improve the credibility we propose using a class of generative models that has recently been developed in the machine learning literature, termed Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) which can be used to systematically generate artificial data that closely mimics existing datasets. Thus, in combination with existing real data sets, GANs can be used to limit the degrees of freedom in Monte Carlo study designs for the researcher, making any comparisons more convincing. In addition, if an applied researcher is concerned with the performance of a particular statistical method on a specific data set (beyond its theoretical properties in large samples), she can use such GANs to assess the performance of the proposed method, e.g. the coverage rate of confidence intervals or the bias of the estimator, using simulated data which closely resembles the exact setting of interest. To illustrate these methods we apply Wasserstein GANs (WGANs) to the estimation of average treatment effects. In this example, we find that (i) there is not a single estimator that outperforms the others in all three settings, so researchers should tailor their analytic approach to a given setting, (ii) systematic simulation studies can be helpful for selecting among competing methods in this situation, and (iii) the generated data closely resemble the actual data.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文