Validating Causal Message Passing Against Network-Aware Methods on Real Experiments
在真实实验中将因果消息传递与网络感知方法比较验证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:摘要明确研究网络干扰下的总处理效应与溢出效应,并使用真实随机实验进行方法比较,因此属于因果推断及网络与干扰。
在真实实验中将因果消息传递与网络感知方法比较验证AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Estimating total treatment effects in the presence of network interference typically requires knowledge of the underlying interaction structure. However, in many practical settings, network data is either unavailable, incomplete, or measured with substantial error. We demonstrate that causal message passing, a methodology that leverages temporal structure in outcome data rather than network topology, can recover total treatment effects comparable to network-aware approaches. We apply causal message passing to two large-scale field experiments where a recently developed bipartite graph methodology, which requires network knowledge, serves as a benchmark. Despite having no access to the interaction network, causal message passing produces effect estimates that match the network-aware approach in direction across all metrics and in statistical significance for the primary decision metric. Our findings validate the premise of causal message passing: that temporal variation in outcomes can serve as an effective substitute for network observation when estimating spillover effects. This has important practical implications: practitioners facing settings where network data is costly to collect, proprietary, or unreliable can instead exploit the temporal dynamics of their experimental data.