Causal inference with misspecified exposure mappings: separating definitions and assumptions
暴露映射误设下的因果推断:分离效应定义与结构假设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:摘要明确讨论实验单位间互动、干扰结构和暴露效应的因果估计,直接对应因果推断以及网络与干扰方向。
暴露映射误设下的因果推断:分离效应定义与结构假设AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Exposure mappings facilitate investigations of complex causal effects when units interact in experiments. Current methods require experimenters to use the same exposure mappings both to define the effect of interest and to impose assumptions on the interference structure. However, the two roles rarely coincide in practice, and experimenters are forced to make the often questionable assumption that their exposures are correctly specified. This paper argues that the two roles exposure mappings currently serve can, and typically should, be separated, so that exposures are used to define effects without necessarily assuming that they are capturing the complete causal structure in the experiment. The paper shows that this approach is practically viable by providing conditions under which exposure effects can be precisely estimated when the exposures are misspecified. Some important questions remain open.