跳到正文
收录说明
收录范围
保留计量方法研究、相关统计基础,以及实质涉及计量方法的应用、教程、比较和综述。书评、刊务及明确无关内容不公开;身份或相关性证据不足的记录保留待核,补充可靠材料后可重新判断。
预印本来自 arXiv 计量经济学及相关统计、金融分类和主题检索。主题检索从 2021 年起回补;关注作者追溯更早年份,部分历史文献按已核验编号补录。收录不表示通过同行评审,仍可能遗漏。
本库首次提交范围:2004-06-23 — 2026-10-14。
阅读范围
默认显示本库全部预印本。可选“优先阅读”:至少一位作者同时满足有可核验的本站覆盖期刊正式发表记录,且 OpenAlex 总引用超过 1,000 次。按同一作者身份匹配,两项缺一不可。此筛选提供阅读线索,不作为论文质量判断。
日期与排序
默认按最近修订排序;年份和日期筛选使用首次提交时间。同一 arXiv 编号的修订会合并。仅有月份或年份时,日期区间相交也会纳入。

日期精度:到日 6 篇 · 到月 0 篇 · 到年 0 篇

分类与引用
领域和方法依据题名、摘要初步分类,可人工修正;分类不代表论文质量。引用数采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计版本。
更新与 AI 解读
正常题录、可靠摘要与引用同步继续;日、周、月简报按核实的发表与修订日期汇总,历史补录保留在文献库。AI 解读依据可靠摘要或已核实原文片段,已有解读保留供阅读参考;缺少可靠材料的条目保持待解读,浏览页面不会触发生成。
6 篇论文
导出

Uncovering Bias Mechanisms in Observational Studies

揭示观测研究中的偏差机制

Observational studies are a key resource for causal inference but are often affected by systematic biases. Prior work has focused mainly on detecting these biases, via sensitivity analyses and comparisons with randomized controlled trials, or mitigating them through debiasing techniques. However, there remains a lack of methodology for uncovering the underlying mechanisms driving these biases, e.g., whether due to hidden confounding or selection of participants. In this…

AI 解读阅读原文 ↗BibTeX ↓

Probably approximately correct high-dimensional causal effect estimation given a valid adjustment set

已知有效调整集下高维因果效应估计的 PAC 保证

Accurate estimates of causal effects play a key role in decision-making across applications such as healthcare, economics, and operations. In the absence of randomized experiments, a common approach to estimating causal effects uses \textit{covariate adjustment}. In this paper, we study covariate adjustment for discrete distributions from the PAC learning perspective, assuming knowledge of a valid adjustment set $\bZ$, which might be high-dimensional. Our first main result…

AI 解读阅读原文 ↗BibTeX ↓

Benchmarking Observational Studies with Experimental Data under Right-Censoring

右删失下利用实验数据检验观察性研究

Drawing causal inferences from observational studies (OS) requires unverifiable validity assumptions; however, one can falsify those assumptions by benchmarking the OS with experimental data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT). A major limitation of existing procedures is not accounting for censoring, despite the abundance of RCTs and OSes that report right-censored time-to-event outcomes. We consider two cases where censoring time (1) is independent of time-to-event…

AI 解读阅读原文 ↗BibTeX ↓

Understanding the Risks and Rewards of Combining Unbiased and Possibly Biased Estimators, with Applications to Causal Inference

组合无偏与可能有偏估计量的风险和收益:因果推断应用

Several problems in statistics involve the combination of high-variance unbiased estimators with low-variance estimators that are only unbiased under strong assumptions. A notable example is the estimation of causal effects while combining small experimental datasets with larger observational datasets. There exist a series of recent proposals on how to perform such a combination, even when the bias of the low-variance estimator is unknown. To build intuition for the…

AI 解读阅读原文 ↗BibTeX ↓

Conformalized Unconditional Quantile Regression

共形化无条件分位数回归

We develop a predictive inference procedure that combines conformal prediction (CP) with unconditional quantile regression (QR) -- a commonly used tool in econometrics that involves regressing the recentered influence function (RIF) of the quantile functional over input covariates. Unlike the more widely-known conditional QR, unconditional QR explicitly captures the impact of changes in covariate distribution on the quantiles of the marginal distribution of outcomes.…

AI 解读阅读原文 ↗BibTeX ↓

Falsification of Internal and External Validity in Observational Studies via Conditional Moment Restrictions

通过条件矩限制证伪观察性研究的内部与外部有效性

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT)s are relied upon to assess new treatments, but suffer from limited power to guide personalized treatment decisions. On the other hand, observational (i.e., non-experimental) studies have large and diverse populations, but are prone to various biases (e.g. residual confounding). To safely leverage the strengths of observational studies, we focus on the problem of falsification, whereby RCTs are used to validate causal effect estimates…

AI 解读阅读原文 ↗BibTeX ↓