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:摘要明确在潜在结果框架下研究反事实、个体处理效应及随机与观察性研究。

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
Lihua Lei

反事实与个体处理效应的共形推断

研究问题
在潜在结果框架下,怎样为反事实和个体处理效应构造可靠区间,并分别在随机试验与观察性研究中刻画覆盖保证?
方法与思路
作者提出共形推断方法;随机试验下研究有限样本平均覆盖,其他所述情形下结合倾向得分和潜在结果条件分位数估计。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称完全依从的完全或分层随机试验具有有限样本平均覆盖保证;所述其他情形下则有近似覆盖的双重稳健性质。
阅读关注点
核对反事实与个体效应区间的各自构造、依从与强可忽略性条件,以及平均覆盖、近似误差和区间长度之间的关系。
阅读边界
仅据所给 Crossref 摘要;平均覆盖不等于每个协变量条件下的覆盖,具体误差界未说明,观察性结论依赖强可忽略性等条件。

原文摘要

Abstract Evaluating treatment effect heterogeneity widely informs treatment decision making. At the moment, much emphasis is placed on the estimation of the conditional average treatment effect via flexible machine learning algorithms. While these methods enjoy some theoretical appeal in terms of consistency and convergence rates, they generally perform poorly in terms of uncertainty quantification. This is troubling since assessing risk is crucial for reliable decision-making in sensitive and uncertain environments. In this work, we propose a conformal inference-based approach that can produce reliable interval estimates for counterfactuals and individual treatment effects under the potential outcome framework. For completely randomized or stratified randomized experiments with perfect compliance, the intervals have guaranteed average coverage in finite samples regardless of the unknown data generating mechanism. For randomized experiments with ignorable compliance and general observational studies obeying the strong ignorability assumption, the intervals satisfy a doubly robust property which states the following: the average coverage is approximately controlled if either the propensity score or the conditional quantiles of potential outcomes can be estimated accurately. Numerical studies on both synthetic and real data sets empirically demonstrate that existing methods suffer from a significant coverage deficit even in simple models. In contrast, our methods achieve the desired coverage with reasonably short intervals.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文