Search for: All records

Estimating the effect of treatments from natural experiments, where treatments are pre-assigned, is an important and well-studied problem. We introduce a novel natural experiment dataset obtained from an early childhood literacy nonprofit. Surprisingly, applying over 20 established estimators to the dataset produces inconsistent results in evaluating the nonprofits efficacy. To address this, we create a benchmark to evaluate estimator accuracy using synthetic outcomes, whose design was guided by domain experts. The benchmark extensively explores performance as real world conditions like sample size, treatment correlation, and propensity score accuracy vary. Based on our benchmark, we observe that the class of doubly robust treatment effect estimators, which are based on simple and intuitive regression adjustment, generally outperform other more complicated estimators by orders of magnitude. To better support our theoretical understanding of doubly robust estimators, we derive a closed form expression for the variance of any such estimator that uses dataset splitting to obtain an unbiased estimate. This expression motivates the design of a new doubly robust estimator that uses a novel loss function when fitting functions for regression adjustment. We release the dataset and benchmark in a Python package; the package is built in a modular way to facilitate new datasets and estimators. https://github.com/rtealwitter/naturalexperiments. 

Making fair decisions is crucial to ethically implementing machine learning algorithms in social settings. In this work, we consider the celebrated definition of counterfactual fairness. We begin by showing that an algorithm which satisfies counterfactual fairness also satisfies demographic parity, a far simpler fairness constraint. Similarly, we show that all algorithms satisfying demographic parity can be trivially modified to satisfy counterfactual fairness. Together, our results indicate that counterfactual fairness is basically equivalent to demographic parity, which has important implications for the growing body of work on counterfactual fairness. We then validate our theoretical findings empirically, analyzing three existing algorithms for counterfactual fairness against three simple benchmarks. We find that two simple benchmark algorithms outperform all three existing algorithms---in terms of fairness, accuracy, and efficiency---on several data sets. Our analysis leads us to formalize a concrete fairness goal: to preserve the order of individuals within protected groups. We believe transparency around the ordering of individuals within protected groups makes fair algorithms more trustworthy. By design, the two simple benchmark algorithms satisfy this goal while the existing algorithms do not. 

We consider the problem of solving the Min-Sum Submodular Cover problem using local search. The Min-Sum Submodular Cover problem generalizes the NP-complete Min-Sum Set Cover problem, replacing the input set cover instance with a monotone submodular set function. A simple greedy algorithm achieves an approximation factor of 4, which is tight unless P=NP [Streeter and Golovin, NeurIPS, 2008]. We complement the greedy algorithm with analysis of a local search algorithm. Building on work of Munagala et al. [ICDT, 2005], we show that, using simple initialization, a straightforward local search algorithm achieves a (4+ε)-approximate solution in time O(n³log(n/ε)), provided that the monotone submodular set function is also second-order supermodular. Second-order supermodularity has been shown to hold for a number of submodular functions of practical interest, including functions associated with set cover, matching, and facility location. We present experiments on two special cases of Min-Sum Submodular Cover and find that the local search algorithm can outperform the greedy algorithm on small data sets.