We study the problem of learning personalized decision policies from observational data while accounting for possible unobserved confounding in the data-generating process. Unlike previous approaches that assume unconfoundedness, i.e., no unobserved confounders affected both treatment assignment and outcomes, we calibrate policy learning for realistic violations of this unverifiable assumption with uncertainty sets motivated by sensitivity analysis in causal inference. Our framework for confounding-robust policy improvement optimizes the minimax regret of a candidate policy against a baseline or reference "status quo" policy, over an uncertainty set around nominal propensity weights. We prove that if the uncertainty set is well-specified, robust policy learning can do no worse than the baseline, and only improve if the data supports it. We characterize the adversarial subproblem and use efficient algorithmic solutions to optimize over parametrized spaces of decision policies such as logistic treatment assignment. We assess our methods on synthetic data and a large clinical trial, demonstrating that confounded selection can hinder policy learning and lead to unwarranted harm, while our robust approach guarantees safety and focuses on well-evidenced improvement.
more »
« less
A Computational Framework for Solving Nonlinear Binary Optimization Problems in Robust Causal Inference
Identifying cause-effect relations among variables is a key step in the decision-making process. Whereas causal inference requires randomized experiments, researchers and policy makers are increasingly using observational studies to test causal hypotheses due to the wide availability of data and the infeasibility of experiments. The matching method is the most used technique to make causal inference from observational data. However, the pair assignment process in one-to-one matching creates uncertainty in the inference because of different choices made by the experimenter. Recently, discrete optimization models have been proposed to tackle such uncertainty; however, they produce 0-1 nonlinear problems and lack scalability. In this work, we investigate this emerging data science problem and develop a unique computational framework to solve the robust causal inference test instances from observational data with continuous outcomes. In the proposed framework, we first reformulate the nonlinear binary optimization problems as feasibility problems. By leveraging the structure of the feasibility formulation, we develop greedy schemes that are efficient in solving robust test problems. In many cases, the proposed algorithms achieve a globally optimal solution. We perform experiments on real-world data sets to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithms and compare our results with the state-of-the-art solver. Our experiments show that the proposed algorithms significantly outperform the exact method in terms of computation time while achieving the same conclusion for causal tests. Both numerical experiments and complexity analysis demonstrate that the proposed algorithms ensure the scalability required for harnessing the power of big data in the decision-making process. Finally, the proposed framework not only facilitates robust decision making through big-data causal inference, but it can also be utilized in developing efficient algorithms for other nonlinear optimization problems such as quadratic assignment problems. History: Accepted by Ram Ramesh, Area Editor for Data Science and Machine Learning. Funding: This work was supported by the Division of Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing Innovation of the National Science Foundation [Grant 2047094]. Supplemental Material: The online supplements are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/ijoc.2022.1226 .
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2047094
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10415839
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- INFORMS Journal on Computing
- Volume:
- 34
- Issue:
- 6
- ISSN:
- 1091-9856
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 3023 to 3041
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)Using unreliable information sources generating conflicting evidence may lead to a large uncertainty, which significantly hurts the decision making process. Recently, many approaches have been taken to integrate conflicting data from multiple sources and/or fusing conflicting opinions from different entities. To explicitly deal with uncertainty, a belief model called Subjective Logic (SL), as a variant of Dumpster-Shafer Theory, has been proposed to represent subjective opinions and to merge multiple opinions by offering a rich volume of fusing operators, which have been used to solve many opinion inference problems in trust networks. However, the operators of SL are known to be lack of scalability in inferring unknown opinions from large network data as a result of the sequential procedures of merging multiple opinions. In addition, SL does not consider deriving opinions in the presence of conflicting evidence. In this work, we propose a hybrid inference method that combines SL and Probabilistic Soft Logic (PSL), namely, Collective Subjective Plus, CSL + , which is resistible to highly conflicting evidence or a lack of evidence. PSL can reason a belief in a collective manner to deal with large-scale network data, allowing high scalability based on relationships between opinions. However, PSL does not consider an uncertainty dimension in a subjective opinion. To take benefits from both SL and PSL, we proposed a hybrid approach called CSL + for achieving high scalability and high prediction accuracy for unknown opinions with uncertainty derived from a lack of evidence and/or conflicting evidence. Through the extensive experiments on four semi-synthetic and two real-world datasets, we showed that the CSL + outperforms the state-of-the-art belief model (i.e., SL), probabilistic inference models (i.e., PSL, CSL), and deep learning model (i.e., GCN-VAE-opinion) in terms of prediction accuracy, computational complexity, and real running time.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Short-term forecasts of nonlinear dynamics are important for risk-assessment studies and to inform sustainable decision-making for physical, biological and financial problems, among others. Generally, the accuracy of short-term forecasts depends upon two main factors: the capacity of learning algorithms to generalize well on unseen data and the intrinsic predictability of the dynamics. While generalization skills of learning algorithms can be assessed with well-established methods, estimating the predictability of the underlying nonlinear generating process from empirical time series remains a big challenge. Here, we show that, in changing environments, the predictability of nonlinear dynamics can be associated with the time-varying stability of the system with respect to smooth changes in model parameters, i.e. its local structural stability. Using synthetic data, we demonstrate that forecasts from locally structurally unstable states in smoothly changing environments can produce significantly large prediction errors, and we provide a systematic methodology to identify these states from data. Finally, we illustrate the practical applicability of our results using an empirical dataset. Overall, this study provides a framework to associate an uncertainty level with short-term forecasts made in smoothly changing environments.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Evaluating treatment effect heterogeneity widely informs treatment decision making. At the moment, much emphasis is placed on the estimation of the conditional average treatment effect via flexible machine learning algorithms. While these methods enjoy some theoretical appeal in terms of consistency and convergence rates, they generally perform poorly in terms of uncertainty quantification. This is troubling since assessing risk is crucial for reliable decision-making in sensitive and uncertain environments. In this work, we propose a conformal inference-based approach that can produce reliable interval estimates for counterfactuals and individual treatment effects under the potential outcome framework. For completely randomized or stratified randomized experiments with perfect compliance, the intervals have guaranteed average coverage in finite samples regardless of the unknown data generating mechanism. For randomized experiments with ignorable compliance and general observational studies obeying the strong ignorability assumption, the intervals satisfy a doubly robust property which states the following: the average coverage is approximately controlled if either the propensity score or the conditional quantiles of potential outcomes can be estimated accurately. Numerical studies on both synthetic and real data sets empirically demonstrate that existing methods suffer from a significant coverage deficit even in simple models. In contrast, our methods achieve the desired coverage with reasonably short intervals.
-
Robust Markov decision processes (MDPs) compute reliable solutions for dynamic decision problems with partially-known transition probabilities. Unfortunately, accounting for uncertainty in the transition probabilities significantly increases the computational complexity of solving robust MDPs, which limits their scalability. This paper describes new, efficient algorithms for solving the common class of robust MDPs with s- and sa-rectangular ambiguity sets defined by weighted L1 norms. We propose partial policy iteration, a new, efficient, flexible, and general policy iteration scheme for robust MDPs. We also propose fast methods for computing the robust Bellman operator in quasi-linear time, nearly matching the ordinary Bellman operator's linear complexity. Our experimental results indicate that the proposed methods are many orders of magnitude faster than the state-of-the-art approach, which uses linear programming solvers combined with a robust value iteration.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1287/ijoc.2022.1226
