The presence of missing values makes supervised learning much more challenging. Indeed, previous work has shown that even when the response is a linear function of the complete data, the optimal predictor is a complex function of the observed entries and the missingness indicator. As a result, the computational or sample complexities of consistent approaches depend on the number of missing patterns, which can be exponential in the number of dimensions. In this work, we derive the analytical form of the optimal predictor under a linearity assumption and various missing data mechanisms including Missing at Random (MAR) and self-masking (Missing Not At Random). Based on a Neumann-series approximation of the optimal predictor, we propose a new principled architecture, named NeuMiss networks. Their originality and strength come from the use of a new type of non-linearity: the multiplication by the missingness indicator. We provide an upper bound on the Bayes risk of NeuMiss networks, and show that they have good predictive accuracy with both a number of parameters and a computational complexity independent of the number of missing data patterns. As a result they scale well to problems with many features, and remain statistically efficient for medium-sized samples. Moreover, we show that, contrary to procedures using EM or imputation, they are robust to the missing data mechanism, including difficult MNAR settings such as self-masking.

Data collection often reflects human decisions. In healthcare, for instance, a referral for a diagnostic test is influenced by the patient's health, their preferences, available resources, and the practitioner's recommendations. Despite the extensive literature on the informativeness of missingness, its implications on the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) have not been studied. Through a series of experiments on data from Columbia University Medical Center, a large urban academic medical center, and MIMIC-IV, we demonstrate that patterns of missingness significantly impact zero-shot predictive performance. Notably, the explicit inclusion of missingness indicators at prompting benefits some while hurting other LLMs' zero-shot predictive performance and calibration, suggesting an inconsistent impact. The proposed aggregated analysis and theoretical insights suggest that larger models benefit from these interventions, while smaller models can be negatively impacted. The LLM paradigm risks obscuring the impact of missingness, often neglected even in conventional ML, even further. We conclude that there is a need for more transparent accounting and systematic evaluation of the impact of representing (informative) missingness on downstream performance.

Missing records are a perennial problem in analysis of complex data of all types, when the target of inference is some function of the full data law. In simple cases, where data is missing at random or completely at random [15], well-known adjustments exist that result in consistent estimators of target quantities. Assumptions underlying these estimators are generally not realistic in practical missing data problems. Unfortunately, consistent estimators in more complex cases where data is missing not at random, and where no ordering on variables induces monotonicity of missingness status are not known in general, with some notable exceptions [13, 18, 16]. In this paper, we propose a general class of consistent estimators for cases where data is missing not at random, and missingness status is non-monotonic. Our estimators, which are generalized inverse probability weighting estimators, make no assumptions on the underlying full data law, but instead place independence restrictions, and certain other fairly mild assumptions, on the distribution of miss-ingness status conditional on the data. The assumptions we place on the distribution of missingness status conditional on the data can be viewed as a version of a conditional Markov random field (MRF) corresponding to a chain graph. Assumptions embedded in our model permit identification from the observed data law, and admit a natural fitting procedure based on the pseudo likelihood approach of [2]. We illustrate our approach with a simple simulation study, and an analysis of risk of premature birth in women in Botswana exposed to highly active anti-retroviral therapy.

Discovery of causal relations from observational data is essential for many disciplines of science and real-world applications.

Missing data is an important problem in machine learning practice.

Many important datasets contain samples that are missing one or more feature values. Maintaining the interpretability of machine learning models in the presence of such missing data is challenging. Singly or multiply imputing missing values complicates the model's mapping from features to labels.

We evaluate the performance of targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) for estimating the average treatment effect in missing data scenarios under varying levels of positivity violations. We employ model- and design-based simulations, with the latter using undersmoothed highly adaptive lasso on the 'WASH Benefits Bangladesh' dataset to mimic real-world complexities. Five missingness-directed acyclic graphs are considered, capturing common missing data mechanisms in epidemiological research, particularly in one-point exposure studies. These mechanisms include also not-at-random missingness in the exposure, outcome, and confounders. We compare eight missing data methods in conjunction with TMLE as the analysis method, distinguishing between non-multiple imputation (non-MI) and multiple imputation (MI) approaches. The MI approaches use both parametric and machine-learning models. Results show that non-MI methods, particularly complete cases with TMLE incorporating an outcome-missingness model, exhibit lower bias compared to all other evaluated missing data methods and greater robustness against positivity violations across. In Comparison MI with classification and regression trees (CART) achieve lower root mean squared error, while often maintaining nominal coverage rates. Our findings highlight the trade-offs between bias and coverage, and we recommend using complete cases with TMLE incorporating an outcome-missingness model for bias reduction and MI CART when accurate confidence intervals are the priority.

Discovery of causal relations from observational data is essential for many disciplines of science and real-world applications.