The necessity of data driven decisions in healthcare strategy formulation is rapidly increasing. A reliable framework which helps identify factors impacting a Healthcare Provider Facility or a Hospital (from here on termed as Facility) Market Share is of key importance. This pilot study aims at developing a data driven Machine Learning - Regression framework which aids strategists in formulating key decisions to improve the Facilitys Market Share which in turn impacts in improving the quality of healthcare services. The US (United States) healthcare business is chosen for the study; and the data spanning across 60 key Facilities in Washington State and about 3 years of historical data is considered. In the current analysis Market Share is termed as the ratio of facility encounters to the total encounters among the group of potential competitor facilities. The current study proposes a novel two-pronged approach of competitor identification and regression approach to evaluate and predict market share, respectively. Leveraged model agnostic technique, SHAP, to quantify the relative importance of features impacting the market share. The proposed method to identify pool of competitors in current analysis, develops Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs), feature level word vectors and evaluates the key connected components at facility level. This technique is robust since its data driven which minimizes the bias from empirical techniques. Post identifying the set of competitors among facilities, developed Regression model to predict the Market share. For relative quantification of features at a facility level, incorporated SHAP a model agnostic explainer. This helped to identify and rank the attributes at each facility which impacts the market share.

Causal inference is the process of using assumptions, study designs, and estimation strategies to draw conclusions about the causal relationships between variables based on data. This allows researchers to better understand the underlying mechanisms at work in complex systems and make more informed decisions. In many settings, we may not fully observe all the confounders that affect both the treatment and outcome variables, complicating the estimation of causal effects. To address this problem, a growing literature in both causal inference and machine learning proposes to use Instrumental Variables (IV). This paper serves as the first effort to systematically and comprehensively introduce and discuss the IV methods and their applications in both causal inference and machine learning. First, we provide the formal definition of IVs and discuss the identification problem of IV regression methods under different assumptions. Second, we categorize the existing work on IV methods into three streams according to the focus on the proposed methods, including two-stage least squares with IVs, control function with IVs, and evaluation of IVs. For each stream, we present both the classical causal inference methods, and recent developments in the machine learning literature. Then, we introduce a variety of applications of IV methods in real-world scenarios and provide a summary of the available datasets and algorithms. Finally, we summarize the literature, discuss the open problems and suggest promising future research directions for IV methods and their applications. We also develop a toolkit of IVs methods reviewed in this survey at https://github.com/causal-machine-learning-lab/mliv.

Wasserstein distributionally robust optimization (DRO) has found success in operations research and machine learning applications as a powerful means to obtain solutions with favourable out-of-sample performances. Two compelling explanations for the success are the generalization bounds derived from Wasserstein DRO and the equivalency between Wasserstein DRO and the regularization scheme commonly applied in machine learning. Existing results on generalization bounds and the equivalency to regularization are largely limited to the setting where the Wasserstein ball is of a certain type and the decision criterion takes certain forms of an expected function. In this paper, we show that by focusing on Wasserstein DRO problems with affine decision rules, it is possible to obtain generalization bounds and the equivalency to regularization in a significantly broader setting where the Wasserstein ball can be of a general type and the decision criterion can be a general measure of risk, i.e., nonlinear in distributions. This allows for accommodating many important classification, regression, and risk minimization applications that have not been addressed to date using Wasserstein DRO. Our results are strong in that the generalization bounds do not suffer from the curse of dimensionality and the equivalency to regularization is exact. As a byproduct, our regularization results broaden considerably the class of Wasserstein DRO models that can be solved efficiently via regularization formulations.

National research evaluation initiatives and incentive schemes have previously chosen between simplistic quantitative indicators and time-consuming peer review, sometimes supported by bibliometrics. Here we assess whether artificial intelligence (AI) could provide a third alternative, estimating article quality using more multiple bibliometric and metadata inputs. We investigated this using provisional three-level REF2021 peer review scores for 84,966 articles submitted to the UK Research Excellence Framework 2021, matching a Scopus record 2014-18 and with a substantial abstract. We found that accuracy is highest in the medical and physical sciences Units of Assessment (UoAs) and economics, reaching 42% above the baseline (72% overall) in the best case. This is based on 1000 bibliometric inputs and half of the articles used for training in each UoA. Prediction accuracies above the baseline for the social science, mathematics, engineering, arts, and humanities UoAs were much lower or close to zero. The Random Forest Classifier (standard or ordinal) and Extreme Gradient Boosting Classifier algorithms performed best from the 32 tested. Accuracy was lower if UoAs were merged or replaced by Scopus broad categories. We increased accuracy with an active learning strategy and by selecting articles with higher prediction probabilities, as estimated by the algorithms, but this substantially reduced the number of scores predicted.

This document describes strategies for using Artificial Intelligence (AI) to predict some journal article scores in future research assessment exercises. Five strategies have been assessed. These are summarised here for completeness, but we recommend that AI predictions are not used to help make scoring decisions yet but are further explored through pilot testing in the next REF or REF replacement. The pilot testing should assess whether using AI predictions and prediction probabilities alongside, or instead of, bibliometric data would be helpful for any UoAs. For example, depending on UoA, AI predictions may be used to help mop up difficult scoring decisions near the end of the assessment period, to gain interdisciplinary input, as a tiebreaker in the way that bibliometrics are currently sometimes used, or to cross check the final scores.

Estimating the causal effects of a spatially-varying intervention on a spatially-varying outcome may be subject to non-local confounding (NLC), a phenomenon that can bias estimates when the treatments and outcomes of a given unit are dictated in part by the covariates of other nearby units. In particular, NLC is a challenge for evaluating the effects of environmental policies and climate events on health-related outcomes such as air pollution exposure. This paper first formalizes NLC using the potential outcomes framework, providing a comparison with the related phenomenon of causal interference. Then, it proposes a broadly applicable framework, termed "weather2vec", that uses the theory of balancing scores to learn representations of non-local information into a scalar or vector defined for each observational unit, which is subsequently used to adjust for confounding in conjunction with causal inference methods. The framework is evaluated in a simulation study and two case studies on air pollution where the weather is an (inherently regional) known confounder.

This literature review identifies indicators that associate with higher impact or higher quality research from article text (e.g., titles, abstracts, lengths, cited references and readability) or metadata (e.g., the number of authors, international or domestic collaborations, journal impact factors and authors' h-index). This includes studies that used machine learning techniques to predict citation counts or quality scores for journal articles or conference papers. The literature review also includes evidence about the strength of association between bibliometric indicators and quality score rankings from previous UK Research Assessment Exercises (RAEs) and REFs in different subjects and years and similar evidence from other countries (e.g., Australia and Italy). In support of this, the document also surveys studies that used public datasets of citations, social media indictors or open review texts (e.g., Dimensions, OpenCitations, Altmetric.com and Publons) to help predict the scholarly impact of articles. The results of this part of the literature review were used to inform the experiments using machine learning to predict REF journal article quality scores, as reported in the AI experiments report for this project. The literature review also covers technology to automate editorial processes, to provide quality control for papers and reviewers' suggestions, to match reviewers with articles, and to automatically categorise journal articles into fields. Bias and transparency in technology assisted assessment are also discussed.

This paper presents SVAM (Sequential Variance-Altered MLE), a unified framework for learning generalized linear models under adversarial label corruption in training data. SVAM extends to tasks such as least squares regression, logistic regression, and gamma regression, whereas many existing works on learning with label corruptions focus only on least squares regression. SVAM is based on a novel variance reduction technique that may be of independent interest and works by iteratively solving weighted MLEs over variance-altered versions of the GLM objective. SVAM offers provable model recovery guarantees superior to the state-of-the-art for robust regression even when a constant fraction of training labels are adversarially corrupted. SVAM also empirically outperforms several existing problem-specific techniques for robust regression and classification. Code for SVAM is available at https://github.com/purushottamkar/svam/

Causal discovery for quantitative data has been extensively studied but less is known for categorical data. We propose a novel causal model for categorical data based on a new classification model, termed classification with optimal label permutation (COLP). By design, COLP is a parsimonious classifier, which gives rise to a provably identifiable causal model. A simple learning algorithm via comparing likelihood functions of causal and anti-causal models suffices to learn the causal direction. Through experiments with synthetic and real data, we demonstrate the favorable performance of the proposed COLP-based causal model compared to state-of-the-art methods. We also make available an accompanying R package COLP, which contains the proposed causal discovery algorithm and a benchmark dataset of categorical cause-effect pairs.

In the classical setting of self-selection, the goal is to learn $k$ models, simultaneously from observations $(x^{(i)}, y^{(i)})$ where $y^{(i)}$ is the output of one of $k$ underlying models on input $x^{(i)}$. In contrast to mixture models, where we observe the output of a randomly selected model, here the observed model depends on the outputs themselves, and is determined by some known selection criterion. For example, we might observe the highest output, the smallest output, or the median output of the $k$ models. In known-index self-selection, the identity of the observed model output is observable; in unknown-index self-selection, it is not. Self-selection has a long history in Econometrics and applications in various theoretical and applied fields, including treatment effect estimation, imitation learning, learning from strategically reported data, and learning from markets at disequilibrium. In this work, we present the first computationally and statistically efficient estimation algorithms for the most standard setting of this problem where the models are linear. In the known-index case, we require poly$(1/\varepsilon, k, d)$ sample and time complexity to estimate all model parameters to accuracy $\varepsilon$ in $d$ dimensions, and can accommodate quite general selection criteria. In the more challenging unknown-index case, even the identifiability of the linear models (from infinitely many samples) was not known. We show three results in this case for the commonly studied $\max$ self-selection criterion: (1) we show that the linear models are indeed identifiable, (2) for general $k$ we provide an algorithm with poly$(d) \exp(\text{poly}(k))$ sample and time complexity to estimate the regression parameters up to error $1/\text{poly}(k)$, and (3) for $k = 2$ we provide an algorithm for any error $\varepsilon$ and poly$(d, 1/\varepsilon)$ sample and time complexity.