Rule set learning has long been studied and has recently been frequently revisited due to the need for interpretable models. Still, existing methods have several shortcomings: 1) most recent methods require a binary feature matrix as input, while learning rules directly from numeric variables is understudied; 2) existing methods impose orders among rules, either explicitly or implicitly, which harms interpretability; and 3) currently no method exists for learning probabilistic rule sets for multi-class target variables (there is only one for probabilistic rule lists). We propose TURS, for Truly Unordered Rule Sets, which addresses these shortcomings. We first formalize the problem of learning truly unordered rule sets. To resolve conflicts caused by overlapping rules, i.e., instances covered by multiple rules, we propose a novel approach that exploits the probabilistic properties of our rule sets. We next develop a two-phase heuristic algorithm that learns rule sets by carefully growing rules. An important innovation is that we use a surrogate score to take the global potential of the rule set into account when learning a local rule. Finally, we empirically demonstrate that, compared to non-probabilistic and (explicitly or implicitly) ordered state-of-the-art methods, our method learns rule sets that not only have better interpretability but also better predictive performance.

Estimating the long-term effects of treatments is of interest in many fields. A common challenge in estimating such treatment effects is that long-term outcomes are unobserved in the time frame needed to make policy decisions. One approach to overcome this missing data problem is to analyze treatments effects on an intermediate outcome, often called a statistical surrogate, if it satisfies the condition that treatment and outcome are independent conditional on the statistical surrogate. The validity of the surrogacy condition is often controversial. Here we exploit that fact that in modern datasets, researchers often observe a large number, possibly hundreds or thousands, of intermediate outcomes, thought to lie on or close to the causal chain between the treatment and the long-term outcome of interest. Even if none of the individual proxies satisfies the statistical surrogacy criterion by itself, using multiple proxies can be useful in causal inference. We focus primarily on a setting with two samples, an experimental sample containing data about the treatment indicator and the surrogates and an observational sample containing information about the surrogates and the primary outcome. We state assumptions under which the average treatment effect be identified and estimated with a high-dimensional vector of proxies that collectively satisfy the surrogacy assumption, and derive the bias from violations of the surrogacy assumption, and show that even if the primary outcome is also observed in the experimental sample, there is still information to be gained from using surrogates.