Learning treatment effects while treating those in need

Many social programs attempt to allocate scarce resources to people with the greatest need. Indeed, public services increasingly use algorithmic risk assessments motivated by this goal. However, targeting the highest-need recipients often conflicts with attempting to evaluate the causal effect of the program as a whole, as the best evaluations would be obtained by randomizing the allocation. We propose a framework to design randomized allocation rules which optimally balance targeting high-need individuals with learning treatment effects, presenting policymakers with a Pareto frontier between the two goals. We give sample complexity guarantees for the policy learning problem and provide a computationally efficient strategy to implement it. We then apply our framework to data from human services in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. Optimized policies can substantially mitigate the tradeoff between learning and targeting. For example, it is often possible to obtain 90% of the optimal utility in targeting high-need individuals while ensuring that the average treatment effect can be estimated with less than 2 times the samples that a randomized controlled trial would require. Mechanisms for targeting public services often focus on measuring need as accurately as possible. However, our results suggest that algorithmic systems in public services can be most impactful if they incorporate program evaluation as an explicit goal alongside targeting.

Decision-Focused Evaluation of Worst-Case Distribution Shift

Distribution shift is a key challenge for predictive models in practice, creating the need to identify potentially harmful shifts in advance of deployment. Existing work typically defines these worst-case shifts as ones that most degrade the individual-level accuracy of the model. However, when models are used to make a downstream population-level decision like the allocation of a scarce resource, individual-level accuracy may be a poor proxy for performance on the task at hand. We introduce a novel framework that employs a hierarchical model structure to identify worst-case distribution shifts in predictive resource allocation settings by capturing shifts both within and across instances of the decision problem. This task is more difficult than in standard distribution shift settings due to combinatorial interactions, where decisions depend on the joint presence of individuals in the allocation task. We show that the problem can be reformulated as a submodular optimization problem, enabling efficient approximations of worst-case loss. Applying our framework to real data, we find empirical evidence that worst-case shifts identified by one metric often significantly diverge from worst-case distributions identified by other metrics.

Orthogonal Causal Calibration

Estimates of causal parameters such as conditional average treatment effects and conditional quantile treatment effects play an important role in real-world decision making. Given this importance, one should ensure these estimators are calibrated. While there is a rich literature on calibrating estimators of non-causal parameters, very few methods have been derived for calibrating estimators of causal parameters, or more generally estimators of quantities involving nuisance parameters. In this work, we provide a general framework for calibrating predictors involving nuisance estimation. We consider a notion of calibration defined with respect to an arbitrary, nuisance-dependent loss $\ell$, under which we say an estimator $\theta$ is calibrated if its predictions cannot be changed on any level set to decrease loss. We prove generic upper bounds on the calibration error of any causal parameter estimate $\theta$ with respect to any loss $\ell$ using a concept called Neyman Orthogonality. Our bounds involve two decoupled terms - one measuring the error in estimating the unknown nuisance parameters, and the other representing the calibration error in a hypothetical world where the learned nuisance estimates were true. We use our bound to analyze the convergence of two sample splitting algorithms for causal calibration. One algorithm, which applies to universally orthogonalizable loss functions, transforms the data into generalized pseudo-outcomes and applies an off-the-shelf calibration procedure. The other algorithm, which applies to conditionally orthogonalizable loss functions, extends the classical uniform mass binning algorithm to include nuisance estimation. Our results are exceedingly general, showing that essentially any existing calibration algorithm can be used in causal settings, with additional loss only arising from errors in nuisance estimation.

Auditing Fairness under Unobserved Confounding

A fundamental problem in decision-making systems is the presence of inequity across demographic lines. However, inequity can be difficult to quantify, particularly if our notion of equity relies on hard-to-measure notions like risk (e.g., equal access to treatment for those who would die without it). Auditing such inequity requires accurate measurements of individual risk, which is difficult to estimate in the realistic setting of unobserved confounding. In the case that these unobservables "explain" an apparent disparity, we may understate or overstate inequity. In this paper, we show that one can still give informative bounds on allocation rates among high-risk individuals, even while relaxing or (surprisingly) even when eliminating the assumption that all relevant risk factors are observed. We utilize the fact that in many real-world settings (e.g., the introduction of a novel treatment) we have data from a period prior to any allocation, to derive unbiased estimates of risk. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework on a real-world study of Paxlovid allocation to COVID-19 patients, finding that observed racial inequity cannot be explained by unobserved confounders of the same strength as important observed covariates.

Outlier Ranking in Large-Scale Public Health Streams

Disease control experts inspect public health data streams daily for outliers worth investigating, like those corresponding to data quality issues or disease outbreaks. However, they can only examine a few of the thousands of maximally-tied outliers returned by univariate outlier detection methods applied to large-scale public health data streams. To help experts distinguish the most important outliers from these thousands of tied outliers, we propose a new task for algorithms to rank the outputs of any univariate method applied to each of many streams. Our novel algorithm for this task, which leverages hierarchical networks and extreme value analysis, performed the best across traditional outlier detection metrics in a human-expert evaluation using public health data streams. Most importantly, experts have used our open-source Python implementation since April 2023 and report identifying outliers worth investigating 9.1x faster than their prior baseline. Other organizations can readily adapt this implementation to create rankings from the outputs of their tailored univariate methods across large-scale streams.

Federated Epidemic Surveillance

The surveillance of a pandemic is a challenging task, especially when crucial data is distributed and stakeholders cannot or are unwilling to share. To overcome this obstacle, federated methodologies should be developed to incorporate less sensitive evidence that entities are willing to provide. This study aims to explore the feasibility of pushing hypothesis tests behind each custodian's firewall and then meta-analysis to combine the results, and to determine the optimal approach for reconstructing the hypothesis test and optimizing the inference. We propose a hypothesis testing framework to identify a surge in the indicators and conduct power analyses and experiments on real and semi-synthetic data to showcase the properties of our proposed hypothesis test and suggest suitable methods for combining $p$-values. Our findings highlight the potential of using $p$-value combination as a federated methodology for pandemic surveillance and provide valuable insights into integrating available data sources.

Computationally Assisted Quality Control for Public Health Data Streams

Irregularities in public health data streams (like COVID-19 Cases) hamper data-driven decision-making for public health stakeholders. A real-time, computer-generated list of the most important, outlying data points from thousands of daily-updated public health data streams could assist an expert reviewer in identifying these irregularities. However, existing outlier detection frameworks perform poorly on this task because they do not account for the data volume or for the statistical properties of public health streams. Accordingly, we developed FlaSH (Flagging Streams in public Health), a practical outlier detection framework for public health data users that uses simple, scalable models to capture these statistical properties explicitly. In an experiment where human experts evaluate FlaSH and existing methods (including deep learning approaches), FlaSH scales to the data volume of this task, matches or exceeds these other methods in mean accuracy, and identifies the outlier points that users empirically rate as more helpful. Based on these results, FlaSH has been deployed on data streams used by public health stakeholders.

Auditing Fairness by Betting

We provide practical, efficient, and nonparametric methods for auditing the fairness of deployed classification and regression models. Whereas previous work relies on a fixed-sample size, our methods are sequential and allow for the continuous monitoring of incoming data, making them highly amenable to tracking the fairness of real-world systems. We also allow the data to be collected by a probabilistic policy as opposed to sampled uniformly from the population. This enables auditing to be conducted on data gathered for another purpose. Moreover, this policy may change over time and different policies may be used on different subpopulations. Finally, our methods can handle distribution shift resulting from either changes to the model or changes in the underlying population. Our approach is based on recent progress in anytime-valid inference and game-theoretic statistics-the "testing by betting" framework in particular. These connections ensure that our methods are interpretable, fast, and easy to implement. We demonstrate the efficacy of our methods on several benchmark fairness datasets.

Leaving the Nest: Going Beyond Local Loss Functions for Predict-Then-Optimize

Predict-then-Optimize is a framework for using machine learning to perform decision-making under uncertainty. The central research question it asks is, "How can the structure of a decision-making task be used to tailor ML models for that specific task?" To this end, recent work has proposed learning task-specific loss functions that capture this underlying structure. However, current approaches make restrictive assumptions about the form of these losses and their impact on ML model behavior. These assumptions both lead to approaches with high computational cost, and when they are violated in practice, poor performance. In this paper, we propose solutions to these issues, avoiding the aforementioned assumptions and utilizing the ML model's features to increase the sample efficiency of learning loss functions. We empirically show that our method achieves state-of-the-art results in four domains from the literature, often requiring an order of magnitude fewer samples than comparable methods from past work. Moreover, our approach outperforms the best existing method by nearly 200% when the localness assumption is broken.

Ideal Abstractions for Decision-Focused Learning

We present a methodology for formulating simplifying abstractions in machine learning systems by identifying and harnessing the utility structure of decisions. Machine learning tasks commonly involve high-dimensional output spaces (e.g., predictions for every pixel in an image or node in a graph), even though a coarser output would often suffice for downstream decision-making (e.g., regions of an image instead of pixels). Developers often hand-engineer abstractions of the output space, but numerous abstractions are possible and it is unclear how the choice of output space for a model impacts its usefulness in downstream decision-making. We propose a method that configures the output space automatically in order to minimize the loss of decision-relevant information. Taking a geometric perspective, we formulate a step of the algorithm as a projection of the probability simplex, termed fold, that minimizes the total loss of decision-related information in the H-entropy sense. Crucially, learning in the abstracted outcome space requires less data, leading to a net improvement in decision quality. We demonstrate the method in two domains: data acquisition for deep neural network training and a closed-loop wildfire management task.