Search for: All records

Summary A popular method for variance reduction in causal inference is propensity-based trimming, the practice of removing units with extreme propensities from the sample. This practice has theoretical grounding when the data are homoscedastic and the propensity model is parametric (Crump et al., 2009; Yang & Ding, 2018), but in modern settings where heteroscedastic data are analysed with nonparametric models, existing theory fails to support current practice. In this work, we address this challenge by developing new methods and theory for sample trimming. Our contributions are three-fold. First, we describe novel procedures for selecting which units to trim. Our procedures differ from previous works in that we trim, not only units with small propensities, but also units with extreme conditional variances. Second, we give new theoretical guarantees for inference after trimming. In particular, we show how to perform inference on the trimmed subpopulation without requiring that our regressions converge at parametric rates. Instead, we make only fourth-root rate assumptions like those in the double machine learning literature. This result applies to conventional propensity-based trimming as well, and thus may be of independent interest. Finally, we propose a bootstrap-based method for constructing simultaneously valid confidence intervals for multiple trimmed subpopulations, which are valuable for navigating the trade-off between sample size and variance reduction inherent in trimming. We validate our methods in simulation, on the 2007–2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and on a semisynthetic Medicare dataset, and find promising results in all settings. 

Abstract When people are asked to recall their social networks, theoretical and empirical work tells us that they rely on shortcuts, or heuristics. Cognitive social structures (CSSs) are multilayer social networks where each layer corresponds to an individual’s perception of the network. With multiple perceptions of the same network, CSSs contain rich information about how these heuristics manifest, motivating the question,Can we identify people who share the same heuristics?In this work, we propose a method for identifyingcognitive structureacross multiple network perceptions, analogous to how community detection aims to identifysocial structurein a network. To simultaneously model the joint latent social and cognitive structure, we study CSSs as three-dimensional tensors, employing low-rank nonnegative Tucker decompositions (NNTuck) to approximate the CSS—a procedure closely related to estimating a multilayer stochastic block model (SBM) from such data. We propose the resulting latent cognitive space as an operationalization of the sociological theory ofsocial cognitionby identifying individuals who sharerelational schema. In addition to modeling cognitivelyindependent,dependent, andredundantnetworks, we propose a specific model instance and related statistical test for testing when there issocial-cognitive agreementin a network: when the social and cognitive structures are equivalent. We use our approach to analyze four different CSSs and give insights into the latent cognitive structures of those networks. 

Abstract When estimating a global average treatment effect (GATE) under network interference, units can have widely different relationships to the treatment depending on a combination of the structure of their network neighborhood, the structure of the interference mechanism, and how the treatment was distributed in their neighborhood. In this work, we introduce a sequential procedure to generate and select graph- and treatment-based covariates for GATE estimation under regression adjustment. We show that it is possible to simultaneously achieve low bias and considerably reduce variance with such a procedure. To tackle inferential complications caused by our feature generation and selection process, we introduce a way to construct confidence intervals based on a block bootstrap. We illustrate that our selection procedure and subsequent estimator can achieve good performance in terms of root-mean-square error in several semi-synthetic experiments with Bernoulli designs, comparing favorably to an oracle estimator that takes advantage of regression adjustments for the known underlying interference structure. We apply our method to a real-world experimental dataset with strong evidence of interference and demonstrate that it can estimate the GATE reasonably well without knowing the interference processa priori. 

For a broad class of models widely used in practice for choice and ranking data based on Luce's choice axiom, including the Bradley--Terry--Luce and Plackett--Luce models, we show that the associated maximum likelihood estimation problems are equivalent to a classic matrix balancing problem with target row and column sums. This perspective opens doors between two seemingly unrelated research areas, and allows us to unify existing algorithms in the choice modeling literature as special instances or analogs of Sinkhorn's celebrated algorithm for matrix balancing. We draw inspirations from these connections and resolve some open problems on the study of Sinkhorn's algorithm. We establish the global linear convergence of Sinkhorn's algorithm for non-negative matrices whenever finite scaling matrices exist, and characterize its linear convergence rate in terms of the algebraic connectivity of a weighted bipartite graph. We further derive the sharp asymptotic rate of linear convergence, which generalizes a classic result of Knight (2008). To our knowledge, these are the first quantitative linear convergence results for Sinkhorn's algorithm for general non-negative matrices and positive marginals. Our results highlight the importance of connectivity and orthogonality structures in matrix balancing and Sinkhorn's algorithm, which could be of independent interest. More broadly, the connections we establish in this paper between matrix balancing and choice modeling could also help motivate further transmission of ideas and lead to interesting results in both disciplines. 

A core tension in the study of plurality elections is the clash between the classic Hotelling-Downs model, which predicts that two office-seeking candidates should cater to the median voter, and the empirical observation that democracies often have two major parties with divergent policies. Motivated in part by this tension, we introduce a dynamic model of candidate positioning based on a simple bounded rationality heuristic: candidates imitate the policy of previous winners. The resulting model is closely connected to evolutionary replicator dynamics. For uniformly-distributed voters, we prove in our model that with k = 2, 3, or 4 candidates per election, any symmetric candidate distribution converges over time to the center. With k ≥ 5 candidates per election, however, we prove that the candidate distribution does not converge to the center and provide an even stronger non-convergence result in a special case with no extreme candidates. Our conclusions are qualitatively unchanged if a small fraction of candidates are not winner-copiers and are instead positioned uniformly at random in each election. Beyond our theoretical analysis, we illustrate our results in extensive simulations; for five or more candidates, we find a tendency towards the emergence of two clusters, a mechanism suggestive of Duverger's Law, the empirical finding that plurality leads to two-party systems. Our simulations also explore several variations of the model, where we find the same general pattern: convergence to the center with four or fewer candidates, but not with five or more. Finally, we discuss the relationship between our replicator dynamics model and prior work on strategic equilibria of candidate positioning games. 

Multilayer networks describe the rich ways in which nodes are related by accounting for different relationships in separate layers. These multiple relationships are naturally represented by an adjacency tensor. In this work we study the use of the nonnegative Tucker decomposition (NNTuck) of such tensors under a KL loss as an expressive factor model that naturally generalizes existing stochastic block models of multilayer networks. Quantifying interdependencies between layers can identify redundancies in the structure of a network, indicate relationships between disparate layers, and potentially inform survey instruments for collecting social network data. We propose definitions of layer independence, dependence, and redundancy based on likelihood ratio tests between nested nonnegative Tucker decompositions. Using both synthetic and real-world data, we evaluate the use and interpretation of the NNTuck as a model of multilayer networks. Algorithmically, we show that using expectation maximization (EM) to maximize the log-likelihood under the NNTuck is step-by-step equivalent to tensorial multiplicative updates for the NNTuck under a KL loss, extending a previously known equivalence from nonnegative matrices to nonnegative tensors. 

In many contexts involving ranked preferences, agents submit partial orders over available alternatives. Statistical models often treat these as marginal in the space of total orders, but this approach overlooks information contained in the list length itself. In this work, we introduce and taxonomize approaches for jointly modeling distributions over top-k partial orders and list lengths k, considering two classes of approaches: composite models that view a partial order as a truncation of a total order, and augmented ranking models that model the construction of the list as a sequence of choice decisions, including the decision to stop. For composite models, we consider three dependency structures for joint modeling of order and truncation length. For augmented ranking models, we consider different assumptions on how the stop-token choice is modeled. Using data consisting of partial rankings from San Francisco school choice and San Francisco ranked choice elections, we evaluate how well the models predict observed data and generate realistic synthetic datasets. We find that composite models, explicitly modeling length as a categorical variable, produce synthetic datasets with accurate length distributions, and an augmented model with position-dependent item utilities jointly models length and preferences in the training data best, as measured by negative log loss. Methods from this work have significant implications on the simulation and evaluation of real-world social systems that solicit ranked preferences. 

Off-policy evaluation, and the complementary problem of policy learning, use historical data collected under a logging policy to estimate and/or optimize the value of a target policy. Methods for these tasks typically assume overlap between the target and logging policy, enabling solutions based on importance weighting and/or imputation. Absent such an overlap assumption, existing work either relies on a well-specified model or optimizes needlessly conservative bounds. In this work, we develop methods for no-overlap policy evaluation without a well-specified model, relying instead on non-parametric assumptions on the expected outcome, with a particular focus on Lipschitz smoothness. Under such assumptions we are able to provide sharp bounds on the off-policy value, along with asymptotically optimal estimators of those bounds. For Lipschitz smoothness, we construct a pair of linear programs that upper and lower bound the contribution of the no-overlap region to the off-policy value. We show that these programs have a concise closed form solution, and that their solutions converge under the Lipschitz assumption to the sharp partial identification bounds at a minimax optimal rate, up to log factors. We demonstrate the effectiveness our methods on two semi-synthetic examples, and obtain informative and valid bounds that are tighter than those possible without smoothness assumptions. 

A common network inference problem, arising from real-world data constraints, is how to infer a dynamic network from its time-aggregated adjacency matrix and time-varying marginals (i.e., row and column sums). Prior approaches to this problem have repurposed the classic iterative proportional fitting (IPF) procedure, also known as Sinkhorn's algorithm, with promising empirical results. However, the statistical foundation for using IPF has not been well understood: under what settings does IPF provide principled estimation of a dynamic network from its marginals, and how well does it estimate the network? In this work, we establish such a setting, by identifying a generative network model whose maximum likelihood estimates are recovered by IPF. Our model both reveals implicit assumptions on the use of IPF in such settings and enables new analyses, such as structure-dependent error bounds on IPF's parameter estimates. When IPF fails to converge on sparse network data, we introduce a principled algorithm that guarantees IPF converges under minimal changes to the network structure. Finally, we conduct experiments with synthetic and real-world data, which demonstrate the practical value of our theoretical and algorithmic contributions. 

Peer review assignment algorithms aim to match research papers to suitable expert reviewers, working to maximize the quality of the resulting reviews. A key challenge in designing effective assignment policies is evaluating how changes to the assignment algorithm map to changes in review quality. In this work, we leverage recently proposed policies that introduce randomness in peer-review assignment— in order to mitigate fraud—as a valuable opportunity to evaluate counterfactual assignment policies. Specifically, we exploit how such randomized assignments provide a positive probability of observing the reviews of many assignment policies of interest. To address challenges in applying standard off-policy evaluation methods, such as violations of positivity, we introduce novel methods for partial identification based on monotonicity and Lipschitz smoothness assumptions for the mapping between reviewer-paper covariates and outcomes. We apply our methods to peer-review data from two computer science venues: the TPDP'21 workshop (95 papers and 35 reviewers) and the AAAI'22 conference (8,450 papers and 3,145 reviewers). We consider estimates of (i) the effect on review quality when changing weights in the assignment algorithm, e.g., weighting reviewers' bids vs. textual similarity (between the review's past papers and the submission), and (ii) the "cost of randomization", capturing the difference in expected quality between the perturbed and unperturbed optimal match. We find that placing higher weight on text similarity results in higher review quality and that introducing randomization in the reviewer-paper assignment only marginally reduces the review quality. Our methods for partial identification may be of independent interest, while our off-policy approach can likely find use in evaluating a broad class of algorithmic matching systems.