Predicting the effect of interventions with many possible variations, e.g., therapeutic content that affects mental health outcomes or an earnings call transcript that drives movement in share price, is useful across several domains. However, classical causal estimators tend to assume that all possible interventions are observed, which is infeasible when interventions vary widely, for instance, in the space of all text strings. We adapt a well-known approach of recasting causal inference as a learning problem, to address high-dimensional treatment spaces. Specifically, under standard assumptions like no unobserved confounding, we show that causal error decomposes into a series of moment-balancing errors of increasing order, and design objectives that directly improve causal estimation. We also show how to project the effect of a high-dimensional treatment onto lower-dimensional treatment attributes, which allows a single model to answer several causal questions without additional attribute-specific training. We empirically evaluate our estimators in settings with high-dimensional continuous, discrete, and text treatments, the last of which used a semi-synthetic dataset of Amazon Reviews. Our experiments demonstrate the benefit of higher-order balance error optimization and competitive performance of projected causal estimates with attribute-specific estimators.

Estimating heterogeneous treatment effects with machine learning has attracted substantial attention in both academic research and industrial practice. However, the two communities often evaluate models under markedly different conditions. Methodological work typically relies on semi-simulated benchmarks and metrics that require counterfactual outcomes, whereas real-world applications rely on observable metrics based on ranking or test outcomes. Despite the well-known gap between methodological progress and practical deployment, the relationship between these evaluation regimes has not been examined systematically. We conduct a large-scale empirical study of treatment effect evaluation across standard semi-simulated benchmark families and real-world datasets. Our benchmark covers meta-learners paired with multiple base learners, as well as specialized causal machine learning models. We evaluate these methods using observable metrics common in application-oriented literature, alongside counterfactual metrics commonly used in methods papers. Our results reveal two complementary gaps. First, counterfactual metrics do not reliably recover the estimators preferred by observable metrics, even on the same semi-simulated benchmarks. Second, rankings obtained on semi-simulated benchmarks do not transfer to real datasets. We further find that simple meta-learners with strong base models are consistently competitive, in contrast to specialized causal models. Overall, our findings suggest that progress in treatment effect estimation research should not be assessed solely through counterfactual metrics and semi-simulated benchmarks, but it would benefit from incorporating observable metrics and real-data validation.

Reinforcement learning algorithms are generally designed to maximize the expected return across a population. However, a policy that is optimal on average may be suboptimal for certain individuals, leading to potential safety concerns. To address this, we first formalize the notion of individual harm from a counterfactual perspective and define harm as the event in which a chosen action results in a strictly worse outcome than a baseline alternative. We then propose a general two-stage procedure for learning policies that maximize the expected return while accounting for individual harm. We further establish the finite-sample properties of the learned policy, derive an upper bound on its sub-optimality gap, and show that the harm rate remains well-controlled. Numerical experiments on both simulated and real-world datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

The design and analysis of randomized experiments is fundamental to many areas, from the physical and social sciences to industrial settings. Regression adjustment is a popular technique to reduce the variance of estimates obtained from experiments, by utilizing information contained in auxiliary covariates. While there is a large literature within the statistics community studying various approaches to regression adjustment and their asymptotic properties, little focus has been given to approaches in the finite population setting with non-asymptotic accuracy bounds. Further, prior work typically assumes that an entire population is exposed to an experiment, whereas practitioners often seek to minimize the number of subjects exposed to an experiment, for ethical and pragmatic reasons. In this work, we study the problems of estimating the sample mean, individual treatment effects, and average treatment effect with regression adjustment. We propose approaches that use techniques from randomized numerical linear algebra to sample a subset of the population on which to perform an experiment. We give non-asymptotic accuracy bounds for our methods and demonstrate that they compare favorably with prior approaches.

Causal effect estimation from observational data requires careful adjustment for confounding. Classical estimators such as inverse probability weighting and augmented inverse probability weighting are effective under favorable model specification, but may become unstable when treatment assignment and outcome mechanisms are complex, non-linear, and high-dimensional. Machine learning and representation learning approaches improve flexibility, yet joint training can allow outcome-related information to influence treatment-side representations, which is undesirable from a causal perspective. We propose MOCA (Modular One-way Causal Attention), a transformer-based framework that separates treatment and outcome modeling through a modular design, and performs confounder adjustment using a one-way attention mechanism. A cutting-feedback strategy, implemented via gradient detachment, prevents the outcome loss from updating the treatment module. This design preserves directional information flow while retaining the representational power of transformer architectures for causal inference. Across multiple simulated scenarios, including linear, nonlinear, heavy-tailed, hidden confounding, and high-dimensional settings, MOCA shows competitive or improved performance relative to IPW, AIPW, X-learner, TARNet, and DragonNet. We further illustrate the method on the Infant Health and Development Program dataset and the Dehejia-Wahba dataset as real-world benchmarks. These results suggest that modular attention with one-way information flow provides a promising and interpretable direction for causal inference with modern deep learning models.

Interference arises when the treatment assigned to one individual affects the outcomes of other individuals. Commonly, individuals are naturally grouped into clusters, and interference occurs only among individuals within the same cluster, a setting referred to as partial interference. We study network causal effects on outcome quantiles in the presence of partial interference. We develop a general nonparametric efficiency theory for estimating these network quantile causal effects, which leads to a nonparametrically efficient estimator. The proposed estimator is consistent and asymptotically normal with parametric convergence rates, while allowing for flexible, data-adaptive estimation of complex nuisance functions. We leverage a three-way cross-fitting procedure that avoids direct estimation of the conditional outcome distribution. Simulations demonstrate adequate finite-sample performance of the proposed estimators, and we apply the methods to a clustered observational study.

Predicting counterfactual outcomes in longitudinal data, where sequential treatment decisions heavily depend on evolving patient states, is critical yet notoriously challenging due to complex time-dependent confounding and inadequate uncertainty quantification in existing methods. We introduce the Causal Diffusion Model (CDM), the first denoising diffusion probabilistic approach explicitly designed to generate full probabilistic distributions of counterfactual outcomes under sequential interventions. CDM employs a novel residual denoising architecture with relational self-attention, capturing intricate temporal dependencies and multimodal outcome trajectories without requiring explicit adjustments (e.g., inverse-probability weighting or adversarial balancing) for confounding. In rigorous evaluation on a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic tumor-growth simulator widely adopted in prior work, CDM consistently outperforms state-of-the-art longitudinal causal inference methods, achieving a 15-30% relative improvement in distributional accuracy (1-Wasserstein distance) while maintaining competitive or superior point-estimate accuracy (RMSE) under high-confounding regimes. By unifying uncertainty quantification and robust counterfactual prediction in complex, sequentially confounded settings, without tailored deconfounding, CDM offers a flexible, high-impact tool for decision support in medicine, policy evaluation, and other longitudinal domains.

Retrospective causal questions ask what would have happened to an observed individual had they received a different treatment. We study the problem of estimating $μ(x,y)=\mathbb{E}[Y(1)\mid X=x,Y(0)=y]$, the expected counterfactual outcome for an individual with covariates $x$ and observed outcome $y$, and constructing valid prediction intervals under the Neyman-Rubin superpopulation model. This quantity is generally not identified without additional assumptions. To link the observed and unobserved potential outcomes, we work with a cross-world correlation $ρ(x)=cor(Y(1),Y(0)\mid X=x)$; plausible bounds on $ρ(x)$ enable a principled approach to this otherwise unidentified problem. We introduce retrospective counterfactual estimators $\hatμ_ρ(x,y)$ and prediction intervals $C_ρ(x,y)$ that asymptotically satisfy $P[Y(1)\in C_ρ(x,y)\mid X=x, Y(0)=y]\ge1-α$ under standard causal assumptions. Many common baselines implicitly correspond to endpoint choices $ρ=0$ or $ρ=1$ (ignoring the factual outcome or treating the counterfactual as a shifted factual outcome). Interpolating between these cases through cross-world dependence yields substantial gains in both theory and practice.

Predicting potential outcomes of interventions from observational data is crucial for decision-making in medicine, but the task is challenging due to the fundamental problem of causal inference. Existing methods are largely limited to point estimates of potential outcomes with no uncertain quantification; thus, the full information about the distributions of potential outcomes is typically ignored. In this paper, we propose a novel causal diffusion model called DiffPO, which is carefully designed for reliable inferences in medicine by learning the distribution of potential outcomes. In our DiffPO, we leverage a tailored conditional denoising diffusion model to learn complex distributions, where we address the selection bias through a novel orthogonal diffusion loss. Another strength of our DiffPO method is that it is highly flexible (e.g., it can also be used to estimate different causal quantities such as CATE). Across a wide range of experiments, we show that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance.

We propose nonparametric identification and semiparametric estimation of joint potential outcome distributions in the presence of confounding. First, in settings with observed confounding, we derive tighter, covariate-informed bounds on the joint distribution by leveraging conditional copulas. To overcome the non-differentiability of bounding min/max operators, we establish the asymptotic properties for both a direct estimator with polynomial margin condition and a smooth approximation with log-sum-exp operator, facilitating valid inference for individual-level effects under the canonical rank-preserving assumption. Second, we tackle the challenge of unmeasured confounding by introducing a causal representation learning framework. By utilizing instrumental variables, we prove the nonparametric identifiability of the latent confounding subspace under injectivity and completeness conditions. We develop a ``triple machine learning" estimator that employs cross-fitting scheme to sequentially handle the learned representation, nuisance parameters, and target functional. We characterize the asymptotic distribution with variance inflation induced by representation learning error, and provide conditions for semiparametric efficiency. We also propose a practical VAE-based algorithm for confounding representation learning. Simulations and real-world analysis validate the effectiveness of proposed methods. By bridging classical semiparametric theory with modern representation learning, this work provides a robust statistical foundation for distributional and counterfactual inference in complex causal systems.