We consider the estimation of average and counterfactual treatment effects, under two settings: back-door adjustment and front-door adjustment. The goal in both cases is to recover the treatment effect without having an access to a hidden confounder. This objective is attained by first estimating the conditional mean of the desired outcome variable given relevant covariates (the "first stage" regression), and then taking the (conditional) expectation of this function as a "second stage" procedure. We propose to compute these conditional expectations directly using a regression function to the learned input features of the first stage, thus avoiding the need for sampling or density estimation. All functions and features (and in particular, the output features in the second stage) are neural networks learned adaptively from data, with the sole requirement that the final layer of the first stage should be linear. The proposed method is shown to converge to the true causal parameter, and outperforms the recent state-of-the-art methods on challenging causal benchmarks, including settings involving high-dimensional image data.

Meta-training agents with memory has been shown to culminate in Bayes-optimal agents, which casts Bayes-optimality as the implicit solution to a numerical optimization problem rather than an explicit modeling assumption. Bayes-optimal agents are risk-neutral, since they solely attune to the expected return, and ambiguity-neutral, since they act in new situations as if the uncertainty were known. This is in contrast to risk-sensitive agents, which additionally exploit the higher-order moments of the return, and ambiguity-sensitive agents, which act differently when recognizing situations in which they lack knowledge. Humans are also known to be averse to ambiguity and sensitive to risk in ways that aren't Bayes-optimal, indicating that such sensitivity can confer advantages, especially in safety-critical situations. How can we extend the meta-learning protocol to generate risk- and ambiguity-sensitive agents? The goal of this work is to fill this gap in the literature by showing that risk- and ambiguity-sensitivity also emerge as the result of an optimization problem using modified meta-training algorithms, which manipulate the experience-generation process of the learner. We empirically test our proposed meta-training algorithms on agents exposed to foundational classes of decision-making experiments and demonstrate that they become sensitive to risk and ambiguity.

In this paper, we study the classification problem by estimating the conditional probability function of the given data. Different from the traditional expected risk estimation theory on empirical data, we calculate the probability via Fredholm equation, this leads to estimate the distribution of the data. Based on the Fredholm equation, a new expected risk estimation theory by estimating the cumulative distribution function is presented. The main characteristics of the new expected risk estimation is to measure the risk on the distribution of the input space. The corresponding empirical risk estimation is also presented, and an $\varepsilon$-insensitive $L_{1}$ cumulative support vector machines ($\varepsilon$-$L_{1}VSVM$) is proposed by introducing an insensitive loss. It is worth mentioning that the classification models and the classification evaluation indicators based on the new mechanism are different from the traditional one. Experimental results show the effectiveness of the proposed $\varepsilon$-$L_{1}VSVM$ and the corresponding cumulative distribution function indicator on validity and interpretability of small data classification.

We present a novel kernel over the space of probability measures based on the dual formulation of optimal regularized transport. We propose an Hilbertian embedding of the space of probabilities using their Sinkhorn potentials, which are solutions of the dual entropic relaxed optimal transport between the probabilities and a reference measure $\mathcal{U}$. We prove that this construction enables to obtain a valid kernel, by using the Hilbert norms. We prove that the kernel enjoys theoretical properties such as universality and some invariances, while still being computationally feasible. Moreover we provide theoretical guarantees on the behaviour of a Gaussian process based on this kernel. The empirical performances are compared with other traditional choices of kernels for processes indexed on distributions.

It is often said that the fundamental problem of causal inference is a missing data problem -- the comparison of responses to two hypothetical treatment assignments is made difficult because for every experimental unit only one potential response is observed. In this paper, we consider the implications of the converse view: that missing data problems are a form of causal inference. We make explicit how the missing data problem of recovering the complete data law from the observed law can be viewed as identification of a joint distribution over counterfactual variables corresponding to values had we (possibly contrary to fact) been able to observe them. Drawing analogies with causal inference, we show how identification assumptions in missing data can be encoded in terms of graphical models defined over counterfactual and observed variables. We review recent results in missing data identification from this viewpoint. In doing so, we note interesting similarities and differences between missing data and causal identification theories.

Consider making a prediction over new test data without any opportunity to learn from a training set of labelled data - instead given access to a set of expert models and their predictions alongside some limited information about the dataset used to train them. In scenarios from finance to the medical sciences, and even consumer practice, stakeholders have developed models on private data they either cannot, or do not want to, share. Given the value and legislation surrounding personal information, it is not surprising that only the models, and not the data, will be released - the pertinent question becoming: how best to use these models? Previous work has focused on global model selection or ensembling, with the result of a single final model across the feature space. Machine learning models perform notoriously poorly on data outside their training domain however, and so we argue that when ensembling models the weightings for individual instances must reflect their respective domains - in other words models that are more likely to have seen information on that instance should have more attention paid to them. We introduce a method for such an instance-wise ensembling of models, including a novel representation learning step for handling sparse high-dimensional domains. Finally, we demonstrate the need and generalisability of our method on classical machine learning tasks as well as highlighting a real world use case in the pharmacological setting of vancomycin precision dosing.

Bayesian deep learning plays an important role especially for its ability evaluating epistemic uncertainty (EU). Due to computational complexity issues, approximation methods such as variational inference (VI) have been used in practice to obtain posterior distributions and their generalization abilities have been analyzed extensively, for example, by PAC-Bayesian theory; however, little analysis exists on EU, although many numerical experiments have been conducted on it. In this study, we analyze the EU of supervised learning in approximate Bayesian inference by focusing on its excess risk. First, we theoretically show the novel relations between generalization error and the widely used EU measurements, such as the variance and mutual information of predictive distribution, and derive their convergence behaviors. Next, we clarify how the objective function of VI regularizes the EU. With this analysis, we propose a new objective function for VI that directly controls the prediction performance and the EU based on the PAC-Bayesian theory. Numerical experiments show that our algorithm significantly improves the EU evaluation over the existing VI methods.

Proving algorithm-dependent generalization error bounds for gradient-type optimization methods has attracted significant attention recently in learning theory. However, most existing trajectory-based analyses require either restrictive assumptions on the learning rate (e.g., fast decreasing learning rate), or continuous injected noise (such as the Gaussian noise in Langevin dynamics). In this paper, we introduce a new discrete data-dependent prior to the PAC-Bayesian framework, and prove a high probability generalization bound of order $O(\frac{1}{n}\cdot \sum_{t=1}^T(\gamma_t/\varepsilon_t)^2\left\|{\mathbf{g}_t}\right\|^2)$ for Floored GD (i.e. a version of gradient descent with precision level $\varepsilon_t$), where $n$ is the number of training samples, $\gamma_t$ is the learning rate at step $t$, $\mathbf{g}_t$ is roughly the difference of the gradient computed using all samples and that using only prior samples. $\left\|{\mathbf{g}_t}\right\|$ is upper bounded by and and typical much smaller than the gradient norm $\left\|{\nabla f(W_t)}\right\|$. We remark that our bound holds for nonconvex and nonsmooth scenarios. Moreover, our theoretical results provide numerically favorable upper bounds of testing errors (e.g., $0.037$ on MNIST). Using a similar technique, we can also obtain new generalization bounds for certain variants of SGD. Furthermore, we study the generalization bounds for gradient Langevin Dynamics (GLD). Using the same framework with a carefully constructed continuous prior, we show a new high probability generalization bound of order $O(\frac{1}{n} + \frac{L^2}{n^2}\sum_{t=1}^T(\gamma_t/\sigma_t)^2)$ for GLD. The new $1/n^2$ rate is due to the concentration of the difference between the gradient of training samples and that of the prior.

Learning high-level causal representations together with a causal model from unstructured low-level data such as pixels is impossible from observational data alone. We prove under mild assumptions that this representation is however identifiable in a weakly supervised setting. This involves a dataset with paired samples before and after random, unknown interventions, but no further labels. We then introduce implicit latent causal models, variational autoencoders that represent causal variables and causal structure without having to optimize an explicit discrete graph structure. On simple image data, including a novel dataset of simulated robotic manipulation, we demonstrate that such models can reliably identify the causal structure and disentangle causal variables.

Pollutant exposure during gestation is a known and adverse factor for birth and health outcomes. However, the links between prenatal air pollution exposures and educational outcomes are less clear, in particular the critical windows of susceptibility during pregnancy. Using a large cohort of students in North Carolina, we study the link between prenatal daily $\mbox{PM}_{2.5}$ exposure and 4th end-of-grade reading scores. We develop and apply a locally adaptive and highly scalable Bayesian regression model for scalar responses with functional and scalar predictors. The proposed model pairs a B-spline basis expansion with dynamic shrinkage priors to capture both smooth and rapidly-changing features in the regression surface. The model is accompanied by a new decision analysis approach for functional regression that extracts the critical windows of susceptibility and guides the model interpretations. These tools help to identify and address broad limitations with the interpretability of functional regression models. Simulation studies demonstrate more accurate point estimation, more precise uncertainty quantification, and far superior window selection than existing approaches. Leveraging the proposed modeling, computational, and decision analysis framework, we conclude that prenatal $\mbox{PM}_{2.5}$ exposure during early and late pregnancy is most adverse for 4th end-of-grade reading scores.