The estimation of average treatment effects (ATEs), defined as the difference in expected outcomes between treatment and control groups, is a central topic in causal inference. This study develops semiparametric efficient estimators for ATE in a setting where only a treatment group and an unlabeled group--consisting of units whose treatment status is unknown--are observed. This scenario constitutes a variant of learning from positive and unlabeled data (PU learning) and can be viewed as a special case of ATE estimation with missing data. For this setting, we derive the semiparametric efficiency bounds, which characterize the lowest achievable asymptotic variance for regular estimators. We then construct semiparametric efficient ATE estimators that attain these bounds. Our results contribute to the literature on causal inference with missing data and weakly supervised learning.

Estimating conditional average treatment effect from observational data is highly challenging due to the existence of treatment selection bias. Prevalent methods mitigate this issue by aligning distributions of different treatment groups in the latent space. However, there are two critical problems that these methods fail to address: (1) mini-batch sampling effects (MSE), which causes misalignment in non-ideal mini-batches with outcome imbalance and outliers; (2) unobserved confounder effects (UCE), which results in inaccurate discrepancy calculation due to the neglect of unobserved confounders. To tackle these problems, we propose a principled approach named Entire Space CounterFactual Regression (ESCFR), which is a new take on optimal transport in the context of causality. Specifically, based on the framework of stochastic optimal transport, we propose a relaxed masspreserving regularizer to address the MSE issue and design a proximal factual outcome regularizer to handle the UCE issue. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our proposed ESCFR can successfully tackle the treatment selection bias and achieve significantly better performance than state-of-the-art methods.

Estimating Heterogeneous Treatment Effects (HTE) in industrial applications such as AdTech and healthcare presents a dual challenge: extreme class imbalance and heavy-tailed outcome distributions. While the X-Learner framework effectively addresses imbalance through cross-imputation, we demonstrate that it is fundamentally vulnerable to "Outlier Smearing" when reliant on Mean Squared Error (MSE) minimization. In this failure mode, the bias from a few extreme observations ("whales") in the minority group is propagated to the entire majority group during the imputation step, corrupting the estimated treatment effect structure. To resolve this, we propose the Robust X-Learner (RX-Learner). This framework integrates a redescending γ-divergence objective -- structurally equivalent to the Welsch loss under Gaussian assumptions -- into the gradient boosting machinery. We further stabilize the non-convex optimization using a Proxy Hessian strategy grounded in Majorization-Minimization (MM) principles. Empirical evaluation on a semi-synthetic Criteo Uplift dataset demonstrates that the RX-Learner reduces the Precision in Estimation of Heterogeneous Effect (PEHE) metric by 98.6% compared to the standard X-Learner, effectively decoupling the stable "Core" population from the volatile "Periphery".

Individualized treatment regimes (ITRs) aim to improve clinical outcomes by assigning treatment based on patient-specific characteristics. However, existing methods often struggle with high-dimensional covariates, limiting accuracy, interpretability, and real-world applicability. We propose a novel sufficient dimension reduction approach that directly targets the contrast between potential outcomes and identifies a low-dimensional subspace of the covariates capturing treatment effect heterogeneity. This reduced representation enables more accurate estimation of optimal ITRs through outcome-weighted learning. To accommodate observational data, our method incorporates kernel-based covariate balancing, allowing treatment assignment to depend on the full covariate set and avoiding the restrictive assumption that the subspace sufficient for modeling heterogeneous treatment effects is also sufficient for confounding adjustment. We show that the proposed method achieves universal consistency, i.e., its risk converges to the Bayes risk, under mild regularity conditions. We demonstrate its finite sample performance through simulations and an analysis of intensive care unit sepsis patient data to determine who should receive transthoracic echocardiography.

Concerns about how workers are perceived can deter effective collaboration with artificial intelligence (AI). In a field experiment on a large online labor market, I hired 450 U.S.-based remote workers to complete an image-categorization job assisted by AI recommendations. Workers were incentivized by the prospect of a contract extension based on an HR evaluator's feedback. I find that workers adopt AI recommendations at lower rates when their reliance on AI is visible to the evaluator, resulting in a measurable decline in task performance. The effects are present despite a conservative design in which workers know that the evaluator is explicitly instructed to assess expected accuracy on the same AI-assisted task. This reduction in AI reliance persists even when the evaluator is reassured about workers' strong performance history on the platform, underscoring how difficult these concerns are to alleviate. Leveraging the platform's public feedback feature, I introduce a novel incentive-compatible elicitation method showing that workers fear heavy reliance on AI signals a lack of confidence in their own judgment, a trait they view as essential when collaborating with AI.