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。

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。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要直接讨论高维辅助模型估计下低维因果参数的有效推断。

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
Niloofar Moosavi
Jenny Häggström
Xavier de Luna

高维辅助参数下一致有效因果推断的成本与收益

研究问题
估计高维辅助模型时,如何为低维因果参数获得在一类数据生成机制上一致有效的推断,这种保障又带来何种方差代价?
方法与思路
作者综述一致有效因果推断,讨论正则化与模型选择后的分布近似、稀疏性及双重稳健性,并以双重选择结果回归估计作比较。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称一致有效程序通常付出更高变异性代价;所研究的双重选择估计量一致渐近无偏,且在数值实验中变异性较低。
阅读关注点
应核对一致有效、一致渐近无偏与区间覆盖的区别,检查辅助模型的稀疏性权衡,以及数值比较是否同时评价偏差和覆盖率。
阅读边界
所据为 arXiv 预印本,不能据此确认同行评审或期刊接收;摘要未给出稀疏性界限,渐近无偏也不等于具有一致有效推断。

原文摘要

Important advances have recently been achieved in developing procedures yielding uniformly valid inference for a low dimensional causal parameter when high-dimensional nuisance models must be estimated. In this paper, we review the literature on uniformly valid causal inference and discuss the costs and benefits of using uniformly valid inference procedures. Naive estimation strategies based on regularisation, machine learning, or a preliminary model selection stage for the nuisance models have finite sample distributions which are badly approximated by their asymptotic distributions. To solve this serious problem, estimators which converge uniformly in distribution over a class of data generating mechanisms have been proposed in the literature. In order to obtain uniformly valid results in high-dimensional situations, sparsity conditions for the nuisance models need typically to be made, although a double robustness property holds, whereby if one of the nuisance model is more sparse, the other nuisance model is allowed to be less sparse. While uniformly valid inference is a highly desirable property, uniformly valid procedures pay a high price in terms of inflated variability. Our discussion of this dilemma is illustrated by the study of a double-selection outcome regression estimator, which we show is uniformly asymptotically unbiased, but is less variable than uniformly valid estimators in the numerical experiments conducted.

笔记与分组