Causal effect estimation aims at estimating the Average Treatment Effect as well as the Conditional Average Treatment Effect of a treatment to an outcome from the available data. This knowledge is important in many safety-critical domains, where it often needs to be extracted from observational data. In this work, we propose a new causal inference model, named C-XGBoost, for the prediction of potential outcomes. The motivation of our approach is to exploit the superiority of tree-based models for handling tabular data together with the notable property of causal inference neural network-based models to learn representations that are useful for estimating the outcome for both the treatment and non-treatment cases. The proposed model also inherits the considerable advantages of XGBoost model such as efficiently handling features with missing values requiring minimum preprocessing effort, as well as it is equipped with regularization techniques to avoid overfitting/bias. Furthermore, we propose a new loss function for efficiently training the proposed causal inference model. The experimental analysis, which is based on the performance profiles of Dolan and Mor{\'e} as well as on post-hoc and non-parametric statistical tests, provide strong evidence about the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

Treatment effect estimation is of high-importance for both researchers and practitioners across many scientific and industrial domains. The abundance of observational data makes them increasingly used by researchers for the estimation of causal effects. However, these data suffer from biases, from several weaknesses, leading to inaccurate causal effect estimations, if not handled properly. Therefore, several machine learning techniques have been proposed, most of them focusing on leveraging the predictive power of neural network models to attain more precise estimation of causal effects. In this work, we propose a new methodology, named Nearest Neighboring Information for Causal Inference (NNCI), for integrating valuable nearest neighboring information on neural network-based models for estimating treatment effects. The proposed NNCI methodology is applied to some of the most well established neural network-based models for treatment effect estimation with the use of observational data. Numerical experiments and analysis provide empirical and statistical evidence that the integration of NNCI with state-of-the-art neural network models leads to considerably improved treatment effect estimations on a variety of well-known challenging benchmarks.

Recently, many causal estimators for Conditional Average Treatment Effect (CATE) and instrumental variable (IV) problems have been published and open sourced, allowing to estimate granular impact of both randomized treatments (such as A/B tests) and of user choices on the outcomes of interest. However, the practical application of such models has been hampered by the lack of a valid way to score the performance of such models out of sample, in order to select the best one for a given application. We address that gap by proposing novel scoring approaches for both the CATE case and an important subset of instrumental variable problems, namely those where the instrumental variable is customer access to a product feature, and the treatment is the customer's choice to use that feature. Being able to score model performance out of sample allows us to apply hyperparameter optimization methods to causal model selection and tuning. We implement that in an open source package that relies on DoWhy and EconML libraries for implementation of causal inference models (and also includes a Transformed Outcome model implementation), and on FLAML for hyperparameter optimization and for component models used in the causal models. We demonstrate on synthetic data that optimizing the proposed scores is a reliable method for choosing the model and its hyperparameter values, whose estimates are close to the true impact, in the randomized CATE and IV cases. Further, we provide examples of applying these methods to real customer data from Wise.

Estimation of causal effects is the core objective of many scientific disciplines. However, it remains a challenging task, especially when the effects are estimated from observational data. Recently, several promising machine learning models have been proposed for causal effect estimation. The evaluation of these models has been based on the mean values of the error of the Average Treatment Effect (ATE) as well as of the Precision in Estimation of Heterogeneous Effect (PEHE). In this paper, we propose to complement the evaluation of causal inference models using concrete statistical evidence, including the performance profiles of Dolan and Mor{\'e}, as well as non-parametric and post-hoc statistical tests. The main motivation behind this approach is the elimination of the influence of a small number of instances or simulation on the benchmarking process, which in some cases dominate the results. We use the proposed evaluation methodology to compare several state-of-the-art causal effect estimation models.

Data-driven societal event forecasting methods exploit relevant historical information to predict future events. These methods rely on historical labeled data and cannot accurately predict events when data are limited or of poor quality. Studying causal effects between events goes beyond correlation analysis and can contribute to a more robust prediction of events. However, incorporating causality analysis in data-driven event forecasting is challenging due to several factors: (i) Events occur in a complex and dynamic social environment. Many unobserved variables, i.e., hidden confounders, affect both potential causes and outcomes. (ii) Given spatiotemporal non-independent and identically distributed (non-IID) data, modeling hidden confounders for accurate causal effect estimation is not trivial. In this work, we introduce a deep learning framework that integrates causal effect estimation into event forecasting. We first study the problem of Individual Treatment Effect (ITE) estimation from observational event data with spatiotemporal attributes and present a novel causal inference model to estimate ITEs. We then incorporate the learned event-related causal information into event prediction as prior knowledge. Two robust learning modules, including a feature reweighting module and an approximate constraint loss, are introduced to enable prior knowledge injection. We evaluate the proposed causal inference model on real-world event datasets and validate the effectiveness of proposed robust learning modules in event prediction by feeding learned causal information into different deep learning methods. Experimental results demonstrate the strengths of the proposed causal inference model for ITE estimation in societal events and showcase the beneficial properties of robust learning modules in societal event forecasting.

The human mind has a remarkable ability to associate causes with a specific event. From the outcome of an election to an object dropping on the floor, we are constantly associating chains of events that cause a specific effect. Neuropsychology refers to this cognitive ability as causal reasoning. Computer science and economics study a specific form of causal reasoning known as causal inference which focuses on exploring relationships between two observed variables. Over the years, machine learning has produced many methods for causal inference but they remain mostly difficult to use in mainstream applications.

In this work, we formalize the problem of causal inference over graph-based relational time-series data where each node in the graph has one or more time-series associated to it. We propose causal inference models for this problem that leverage both the graph topology and time-series to accurately estimate local causal effects of nodes. Furthermore, the relational time-series causal inference models are able to estimate local effects for individual nodes by exploiting local node-centric temporal dependencies and topological/structural dependencies. We show that simpler causal models that do not consider the graph topology are recovered as special cases of the proposed relational time-series causal inference model. We describe the conditions under which the resulting estimate can be used to estimate a causal effect, and describe how the Durbin-Wu-Hausman test of specification can be used to test for the consistency of the proposed estimator from data. Empirically, we demonstrate the effectiveness of the causal inference models on both synthetic data with known ground-truth and a large-scale observational relational time-series data set collected from Wikipedia.

We discovered secular trend bias in a drug effectiveness study for a recently approved drug. We compared treatment outcomes between patients who received the newly approved drug and patients exposed to the standard treatment. All patients diagnosed after the new drug's approval date were considered. We built a machine learning causal inference model to determine patient subpopulations likely to respond better to the newly approved drug. After identifying the presence of secular trend bias in our data, we attempted to adjust for the bias in two different ways. First, we matched patients on the number of days from the new drug's approval date that the patient's treatment (new or standard) began. Second, we included a covariate in the model for the number of days between the date of approval of the new drug and the treatment (new or standard) start date. Neither approach completely mitigated the bias. Residual bias we attribute to differences in patient disease severity or other unmeasured patient characteristics. Had we not identified the secular trend bias in our data, the causal inference model would have been interpreted without consideration for this underlying bias. Being aware of, testing for, and handling potential bias in the data is essential to diminish the uncertainty in AI modeling.

Bayesian models of multisensory perception traditionally address the problem of estimating an underlying variable that is assumed to be the cause of the two sensory signals. The brain, however, has to solve a more general problem: it also has to establish which signals come from the same source and should be integrated, and which ones do not and should be segregated. In the last couple of years, a few models have been proposed to solve this problem in a Bayesian fashion. One of these has the strength that it formalizes the causal structure of sensory signals. We first compare these models on a formal level. Furthermore, we conduct a psychophysics experiment to test human performance in an auditory-visual spatial localization task in which integration is not mandatory. We find that the causal Bayesian inference model accounts for the data better than other models.

Bayesian models of multisensory perception traditionally address the problem of estimating an underlying variable that is assumed to be the cause of the two sensory signals. The brain, however, has to solve a more general problem: it also has to establish which signals come from the same source and should be integrated, and which ones do not and should be segregated. In the last couple of years, a few models have been proposed to solve this problem in a Bayesian fashion. One of these has the strength that it formalizes the causal structure of sensory signals. We first compare these models on a formal level. Furthermore, we conduct a psychophysics experiment to test human performance in an auditory-visual spatial localization task in which integration is not mandatory. We find that the causal Bayesian inference model accounts for the data better than other models.