Second, they lack a specific focus on selecting a robust CA TE estimator.

Machine learning (ML) algorithms can often differ in performance across domains.

The conditional quantile treatment effect (CQTE) can provide insight into the effect of a treatment beyond the conditional average treatment effect (CA TE). This ability to provide information over multiple quantiles of the response makes the CQTE especially valuable in cases where the effect of a treatment is not well-modelled by a location shift, even conditionally on the covariates. Nevertheless, the estimation of the CQTE is challenging and often depends upon the smoothness of the individual quantiles as a function of the covariates rather than smoothness of the CQTE itself. This is in stark contrast to the CA TE where it is possible to obtain high-quality estimates which have less dependency upon the smoothness of the nuisance parameters when the CA TE itself is smooth. Moreover, relative smoothness of the CQTE lacks the interpretability of smoothness of the CA TE making it less clear whether it is a reasonable assumption to make.

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/

Within heterogeneous treatment effect (HTE) analysis, various estimands have been proposed to capture the effect of a treatment conditional on covariates. Recently, the conditional quantile comparator (CQC) has emerged as a promising estimand, offering quantile-level summaries akin to the conditional quantile treatment effect (CQTE) while preserving some interpretability of the conditional average treatment effect (CATE). It achieves this by summarising the treated response conditional on both the covariates and the untreated response. Despite these desirable properties, the CQC's current estimation is limited by the need to first estimate the difference in conditional cumulative distribution functions and then invert it. This inversion obscures the CQC estimate, hampering our ability to both model and interpret it. To address this, we propose the first direct estimator of the CQC, allowing for explicit modelling and parameterisation. This explicit parameterisation enables better interpretation of our estimate while also providing a means to constrain and inform the model. We show, both theoretically and empirically, that our estimation error depends directly on the complexity of the CQC itself, improving upon the existing estimation procedure. Furthermore, it retains the desirable double robustness property with respect to nuisance parameter estimation. We further show our method to outperform existing procedures in estimation accuracy across multiple data scenarios while varying sample size and nuisance error. Finally, we apply it to real-world data from an employment scheme, uncovering a reduced range of potential earnings improvement as participant age increases.

The growing demand for personalized decision-making has led to a surge of interest in estimating the Conditional Average Treatment Effect (CATE). Various types of CATE estimators have been developed with advancements in machine learning and causal inference. However, selecting the desirable CATE estimator through a conventional model validation procedure remains impractical due to the absence of counterfactual outcomes in observational data.

Statistically correcting measured cross sections for detector effects is an important step across many applications. In particle physics, this inverse problem is known as \textit{unfolding}. In cases with complex instruments, the distortions they introduce are often known only implicitly through simulations of the detector. Modern machine learning has enabled efficient simulation-based approaches for unfolding high-dimensional data. Among these, one of the first methods successfully deployed on experimental data is the \textsc{OmniFold} algorithm, a classifier-based Expectation-Maximization procedure. In practice, however, the forward model is only approximately specified, and the corresponding uncertainty is encoded through nuisance parameters. Building on the well-studied \textsc{OmniFold} algorithm, we show how to extend machine learning-based unfolding to incorporate nuisance parameters. Our new algorithm, called Profile \textsc{OmniFold}, is demonstrated using a Gaussian example as well as a particle physics case study using simulated data from the CMS Experiment at the Large Hadron Collider.

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/

We develop a direct debiased machine learning framework comprising Neyman targeted estimation and generalized Riesz regression. Our framework unifies Riesz regression for automatic debiased machine learning, covariate balancing, targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE), and density-ratio estimation. In many problems involving causal effects or structural models, the parameters of interest depend on regression functions. Plugging regression functions estimated by machine learning methods into the identifying equations can yield poor performance because of first-stage bias. To reduce such bias, debiased machine learning employs Neyman orthogonal estimating equations. Debiased machine learning typically requires estimation of the Riesz representer and the regression function. For this problem, we develop a direct debiased machine learning framework with an end-to-end algorithm. We formulate estimation of the nuisance parameters, the regression function and the Riesz representer, as minimizing the discrepancy between Neyman orthogonal scores computed with known and unknown nuisance parameters, which we refer to as Neyman targeted estimation. Neyman targeted estimation includes Riesz representer estimation, and we measure discrepancies using the Bregman divergence. The Bregman divergence encompasses various loss functions as special cases, where the squared loss yields Riesz regression and the Kullback-Leibler divergence yields entropy balancing. We refer to this Riesz representer estimation as generalized Riesz regression. Neyman targeted estimation also yields TMLE as a special case for regression function estimation. Furthermore, for specific pairs of models and Riesz representer estimation methods, we can automatically obtain the covariate balancing property without explicitly solving the covariate balancing objective.

Second, they lack a specific focus on selecting a robust CA TE estimator.