Search for: All records

Estimation of heterogeneous causal effects—that is, how effects of policies and treatments vary across subjects—is a fundamental task in causal inference. Many methods for estimating conditional average treatment effects (CATEs) have been proposed in recent years, but questions surrounding optimality have remained largely unanswered. In particular, a minimax theory of optimality has yet to be developed, with the minimax rate of convergence and construction of rate-optimal estimators remaining open problems. In this paper, we derive the minimax rate for CATE estimation, in a Hölder-smooth nonparametric model, and present a new local polynomial estimator, giving high-level conditions under which it is minimax optimal. Our minimax lower bound is derived via a localized version of the method of fuzzy hypotheses, combining lower bound constructions for nonparametric regression and functional estimation. Our proposed estimator can be viewed as a local polynomial R-Learner, based on a localized modification of higher-order influence function methods. The minimax rate we find exhibits several interesting features, including a nonstandard elbow phenomenon and an unusual interpolation between nonparametric regression and functional estimation rates. The latter quantifies how the CATE, as an estimand, can be viewed as a regression/functional hybrid. 

We develop and analyse the HulC, an intuitive and general method for constructing confidence sets using the convex hull of estimates constructed from subsets of the data. Unlike classical methods which are based on estimating the (limiting) distribution of an estimator, the HulC is often simpler to use and effectively bypasses this step. In comparison to the bootstrap, the HulC requires fewer regularity conditions and succeeds in many examples where the bootstrap provably fails. Unlike sub-sampling, the HulC does not require knowledge of the rate of convergence of the estimators on which it is based. The validity of the HulC requires knowledge of the (asymptotic) median bias of the estimators. We further analyse a variant of our basic method, called the Adaptive HulC, which is fully data-driven and estimates the median bias using sub-sampling. We discuss these methods in the context of several challenging inferential problems which arise in parametric, semi-parametric, and non-parametric inference. Although our focus is on validity under weak regularity conditions, we also provide some general results on the width of the HulC confidence sets, showing that in many cases the HulC confidence sets have near-optimal width. 

Causal effects are often characterized with averages, which can give an incomplete picture of the underlying counterfactual distributions. Here we consider estimating the entire counterfactual density and generic functionals thereof. We focus on two kinds of target parameters. The first is a density approximation, defined by a projection onto a finite-dimensional model using a generalized distance metric, which includes f-divergences as well as Lp norms. The second is the distance between counterfactual densities, which can be used as a more nuanced effect measure than the mean difference, and as a tool for model selection. We study nonparametric efficiency bounds for these targets, giving results for smooth but otherwise generic models and distances. Importantly, we show how these bounds connect to means of particular non-trivial functions of counterfactuals, linking the problems of density and mean estimation. We go on to propose doubly robust-style estimators for the density approximations and distances, and study their rates of convergence, showing they can be optimally efficient in large nonparametric models. We also give analogous methods for model selection and aggregation, when many models may be available and of interest. Our results all hold for generic models and distances, but throughout we highlight what happens for particular choices, such as L2 projections on linear models, and KL projections on exponential families. Finally we illustrate by estimating the density of CD4 count among patients with HIV, had all been treated with combination therapy versus zidovudine alone, as well as a density effect. Our results suggest combination therapy may have increased CD4 count most for high-risk patients. Our methods are implemented in the freely available R package npcausal on GitHub. 

Many recent developments in causal inference, and functional estimation problems more generally, have been motivated by the fact that classical one-step (first-order) debiasing methods, or their more recent sample-split double machine-learning avatars, can outperform plugin estimators under surprisingly weak conditions. These first-order corrections improve on plugin estimators in a black-box fashion, and consequently are often used in conjunction with powerful off-the-shelf estimation methods. These first-order methods are however provably suboptimal in a minimax sense for functional estimation when the nuisance functions live in Holder-type function spaces. This suboptimality of first-order debiasing has motivated the development of "higher-order" debiasing methods. The resulting estimators are, in some cases, provably optimal over Holder-type spaces, but both the estimators which are minimax-optimal and their analyses are crucially tied to properties of the underlying function space. In this paper we investigate the fundamental limits of structure-agnostic functional estimation, where relatively weak conditions are placed on the underlying nuisance functions. We show that there is a strong sense in which existing first-order methods are optimal. We achieve this goal by providing a formalization of the problem of functional estimation with black-box nuisance function estimates, and deriving minimax lower bounds for this problem. Our results highlight some clear tradeoffs in functional estimation -- if we wish to remain agnostic to the underlying nuisance function spaces, impose only high-level rate conditions, and maintain compatibility with black-box nuisance estimators then first-order methods are optimal. When we have an understanding of the structure of the underlying nuisance functions then carefully constructed higher-order estimators can outperform first-order estimators. 

We introduce a new notion of regularity of an estimator called median regularity. We prove that uniformly valid (honest) inference for a functional is possible if and only if there exists a median regular estimator of that functional. To our knowledge, such a notion of regularity that is necessary for uniformly valid inference is unavailable in the literature.