Abstract Network interference, where the outcome of an individual is affected by the treatment assignment of those in their social network, is pervasive in real-world settings. However, it poses a challenge to estimating causal effects. We consider the task of estimating the total treatment effect (TTE), or the difference between the average outcomes of the population when everyone is treated versus when no one is, under network interference. Under a Bernoulli randomized design, we provide an unbiased estimator for the TTE when network interference effects are constrained to low-order interactions among neighbors of an individual. We make no assumptions on the graph other than bounded degree, allowing for well-connected networks that may not be easily clustered. We derive a bound on the variance of our estimator and show in simulated experiments that it performs well compared with standard estimators for the TTE. We also derive a minimax lower bound on the mean squared error of our estimator, which suggests that the difficulty of estimation can be characterized by the degree of interactions in the potential outcomes model. We also prove that our estimator is asymptotically normal under boundedness conditions on the network degree and potential outcomes model. Central to our contribution is a new framework for balancing model flexibility and statistical complexity as captured by this low-order interactions structure.
more »
« less
Staggered Rollout Designs Enable Causal Inference Under Interference Without Network Knowledge
Randomized experiments are widely used to estimate causal effects across many domains. However, classical causal inference approaches rely on independence assumptions that are violated by network interference, when the treatment of one individual influences the outcomes of others. All existing approaches require at least approximate knowledge of the network, which may be unavailable or costly to collect. We consider the task of estimating the total treatment effect (TTE), the average difference between the outcomes when the whole population is treated versus when the whole population is untreated. By leveraging a staggered rollout design, in which treatment is incrementally given to random subsets of individuals, we derive unbiased estimators for TTE that do not rely on any prior structural knowledge of the network, as long as the network interference effects are constrained to low-degree interactions among neighbors of an individual. We derive bounds on the variance of the estimators, and we show in experiments that our estimator performs well against baselines on simulated data. Central to our theoretical contribution is a connection between staggered rollout observations and polynomial extrapolation.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10437337
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Advances in neural information processing systems
- Volume:
- 35
- ISSN:
- 1049-5258
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 7437--7449
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
The presence of interference, where the outcome of an individual may depend on the treatment assignment and behavior of neighboring nodes, can lead to biased causal effect estimation. Current approaches to network experiment design focus on limiting interference through cluster-based randomization, in which clusters are identified using graph clustering, and cluster randomization dictates the node assignment to treatment and control. However, cluster-based randomization approaches perform poorly when interference propagates in cascades, whereby the response of individuals to treatment propagates to their multi-hop neighbors. When we have knowledge of the cascade seed nodes, we can leverage this interference structure to mitigate the resulting causal effect estimation bias. With this goal, we propose a cascade-based network experiment design that initiates treatment assignment from the cascade seed node and propagates the assignment to their multi-hop neighbors to limit interference during cascade growth and thereby reduce the overall causal effect estimation error. Our extensive experiments on real-world and synthetic datasets demonstrate that our proposed framework outperforms the existing state-of-the-art approaches in estimating causal effects in network data.more » « less
-
Randomized experiments are widely used to estimate the causal effects of a proposed treatment in many areas of science, from medicine and healthcare to the physical and biological sciences, from the social sciences to engineering, and from public policy to the technology industry. Here we consider situations where classical methods for estimating the total treatment effect on a target population are considerably biased due to confounding network effects, i.e., the fact that the treatment of an individual may impact its neighbors’ outcomes, an issue referred to as network interference or as nonindividualized treatment response. A key challenge in these situations is that the network is often unknown and difficult or costly to measure. We assume a potential outcomes model with heterogeneous additive network effects, encompassing a broad class of network interference sources, including spillover, peer effects, and contagion. First, we characterize the limitations in estimating the total treatment effect without knowledge of the network that drives interference. By contrast, we subsequently develop a simple estimator and efficient randomized design that outputs an unbiased estimate with low variance in situations where one is given access to average historical baseline measurements prior to the experiment. Our solution does not require knowledge of the underlying network structure, and it comes with statistical guarantees for a broad class of models. Due to their ease of interpretation and implementation, and their theoretical guarantees, we believe our results will have significant impact on the design of randomized experiments.more » « less
-
Current approaches to A/B testing in networks focus on limiting interference, the concern that treatment effects can “spill over” from treatment nodes to control nodes and lead to biased causal effect estimation. In the presence of interference, two main types of causal effects are direct treatment effects and total treatment effects. In this paper, we propose two network experiment designs that increase the accuracy of direct and total effect estimations in network experiments through minimizing interference between treatment and control units. For direct treatment effect estimation, we present a framework that takes advantage of independent sets and assigns treatment and control only to a set of non-adjacent nodes in a graph, in order to disentangle peer effects from direct treatment effect estimation. For total treatment effect estimation, our framework combines weighted graph clustering and cluster matching approaches to jointly minimize interference and selection bias. Through a series of simulated experiments on synthetic and real-world network datasets, we show that our designs significantly increase the accuracy of direct and total treatment effect estimation in network experiments.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Current approaches to A/B testing in networks focus on limiting interference, the concern that treatment effects can ”spill over” from treatment nodes to control nodes and lead to biased causal effect estimation. Prominent methods for network experiment design rely on two-stage randomization, in which sparsely-connected clusters are identified and cluster randomization dictates the node assignment to treatment and control. Here, we show that cluster randomization does not ensure sufficient node randomization and it can lead to selection bias in which treatment and control nodes represent different populations of users. To address this problem, we propose a principled framework for network experiment design which jointly minimizes interference and selection bias. We introduce the concepts of edge spillover probability and cluster matching and demonstrate their importance for designing network A/B testing. Our experiments on a number of real-world datasets show that our proposed framework leads to significantly lower error in causal effect estimation than existing solutions.more » « less