The Off-Policy Evaluation (OPE) problem consists of evaluating the performance of counterfactual policies with data collected by another one. This problem is of utmost importance for various application domains, e.g., recommendation systems, medical treatments, and many others. To solve the OPE problem, we resort to estimators, which aim to estimate in the most accurate way possible the performance that the counterfactual policies would have had if they were deployed in place of the logging policy. In the literature, several estimators have been developed, all with different characteristics and theoretical guarantees. Therefore, there is no dominant estimator, and each estimator may be the best one for different OPE problems, depending on the characteristics of the dataset at hand. While the selection of the estimator is a crucial choice for an accurate OPE, this problem has been widely overlooked in the literature. We propose an automated data-driven OPE estimator selection method based on machine learning. In particular, the core idea we propose in this paper is to create several synthetic OPE tasks and use a machine learning model trained to predict the best estimator for those synthetic tasks. We empirically show how our method is able to generalize to unseen tasks and make a better estimator selection compared to a baseline method on several real-world datasets, with a computational cost significantly lower than the one of the baseline.

Assessing the effects of a policy based on observational data from a different policy is a common problem across several high-stake decision-making domains, and several off-policy evaluation (OPE) techniques have been proposed. However, these methods largely formulate OPE as a problem disassociated from the process used to generate the data (i.e. structural assumptions in the form of a causal graph). We argue that explicitly highlighting this association has important implications on our understanding of the fundamental limits of OPE. First, this implies that current formulation of OPE corresponds to a narrow set of tasks, i.e. a specific causal estimand which is focused on prospective evaluation of policies over populations or sub-populations. Second, we demonstrate how this association motivates natural desiderata to consider a general set of causal estimands, particularly extending the role of OPE for counterfactual off-policy evaluation at the level of individuals of the population. A precise description of the causal estimand highlights which OPE estimands are identifiable from observational data under the stated generative assumptions. For those OPE estimands that are not identifiable, the causal perspective further highlights where more experimental data is necessary, and highlights situations where human expertise can aid identification and estimation. Furthermore, many formalisms of OPE overlook the role of uncertainty entirely in the estimation process.We demonstrate how specifically characterising the causal estimand highlights the different sources of uncertainty and when human expertise can naturally manage this uncertainty. We discuss each of these aspects as actionable desiderata for future OPE research at scale and in-line with practical utility.