The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations provide a blueprint of a better future by 'leaving no one behind', and, to achieve the SDGs by 2030, poor countries require immense volumes of development aid. In this paper, we develop a causal machine learning framework for predicting heterogeneous treatment effects of aid disbursements to inform effective aid allocation. Specifically, our framework comprises three components: (i) a balancing autoencoder that uses representation learning to embed high-dimensional country characteristics while addressing treatment selection bias; (ii) a counterfactual generator to compute counterfactual outcomes for varying aid volumes to address small sample-size settings; and (iii) an inference model that is used to predict heterogeneous treatment-response curves. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework using data with official development aid earmarked to end HIV/AIDS in 105 countries, amounting to more than USD 5.2 billion. For this, we first show that our framework successfully computes heterogeneous treatment-response curves using semi-synthetic data. Then, we demonstrate our framework using real-world HIV data. Our framework points to large opportunities for a more effective aid allocation, suggesting that the total number of new HIV infections could be reduced by up to 3.3% (~50,000 cases) compared to the current allocation practice.
Fairness for machine learning predictions is widely required in practice for legal, ethical, and societal reasons. Existing work typically focuses on settings without unobserved confounding, even though unobserved confounding can lead to severe violations of causal fairness and, thus, unfair predictions. In this work, we analyze the sensitivity of causal fairness to unobserved confounding. Our contributions are three-fold. First, we derive bounds for causal fairness metrics under different sources of unobserved confounding. This enables practitioners to examine the sensitivity of their machine learning models to unobserved confounding in fairness-critical applications. Second, we propose a novel neural framework for learning fair predictions, which allows us to offer worst-case guarantees of the extent to which causal fairness can be violated due to unobserved confounding. Third, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework in a series of experiments, including a real-world case study about predicting prison sentences. To the best of our knowledge, ours is the first work to study causal fairness under unobserved confounding. To this end, our work is of direct practical value as a refutation strategy to ensure the fairness of predictions in high-stakes applications.
Unobserved confounding is common in many applications, making causal inference from observational data challenging. As a remedy, causal sensitivity analysis is an important tool to draw causal conclusions under unobserved confounding with mathematical guarantees. In this paper, we propose NeuralCSA, a neural framework for generalized causal sensitivity analysis. Unlike previous work, our framework is compatible with (i) a large class of sensitivity models, including the marginal sensitivity model, f-sensitivity models, and Rosenbaum's sensitivity model; (ii) different treatment types (i.e., binary and continuous); and (iii) different causal queries, including (conditional) average treatment effects and simultaneous effects on multiple outcomes. The generality of \frameworkname is achieved by learning a latent distribution shift that corresponds to a treatment intervention using two conditional normalizing flows. We provide theoretical guarantees that NeuralCSA is able to infer valid bounds on the causal query of interest and also demonstrate this empirically using both simulated and real-world data.
State-of-the-art methods for conditional average treatment effect (CATE) estimation make widespread use of representation learning. Here, the idea is to reduce the variance of the low-sample CATE estimation by a (potentially constrained) low-dimensional representation. However, low-dimensional representations can lose information about the observed confounders and thus lead to bias, because of which the validity of representation learning for CATE estimation is typically violated. In this paper, we propose a new, representation-agnostic framework for estimating bounds on the representation-induced confounding bias that comes from dimensionality reduction (or other constraints on the representations) in CATE estimation. First, we establish theoretically under which conditions CATEs are non-identifiable given low-dimensional (constrained) representations. Second, as our remedy, we propose to perform partial identification of CATEs or, equivalently, aim at estimating of lower and upper bounds of the representation-induced confounding bias. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our bounds in a series of experiments. In sum, our framework is of direct relevance in practice where the validity of CATE estimation is of importance.
Fairness in predictions is of direct importance in practice due to legal, ethical, and societal reasons. It is often achieved through counterfactual fairness, which ensures that the prediction for an individual is the same as that in a counterfactual world under a different sensitive attribute. However, achieving counterfactual fairness is challenging as counterfactuals are unobservable. In this paper, we develop a novel deep neural network called Generative Counterfactual Fairness Network (GCFN) for making predictions under counterfactual fairness. Specifically, we leverage a tailored generative adversarial network to directly learn the counterfactual distribution of the descendants of the sensitive attribute, which we then use to enforce fair predictions through a novel counterfactual mediator regularization. If the counterfactual distribution is learned sufficiently well, our method is mathematically guaranteed to ensure the notion of counterfactual fairness. Thereby, our GCFN addresses key shortcomings of existing baselines that are based on inferring latent variables, yet which (a) are potentially correlated with the sensitive attributes and thus lead to bias, and (b) have weak capability in constructing latent representations and thus low prediction performance. Across various experiments, our method achieves state-of-the-art performance. Using a real-world case study from recidivism prediction, we further demonstrate that our method makes meaningful predictions in practice.
Treatment effect estimation in continuous time is crucial for personalized medicine. However, existing methods for this task are limited to point estimates of the potential outcomes, whereas uncertainty estimates have been ignored. Needless to say, uncertainty quantification is crucial for reliable decision-making in medical applications. To fill this gap, we propose a novel Bayesian neural controlled differential equation (BNCDE) for treatment effect estimation in continuous time. In our BNCDE, the time dimension is modeled through a coupled system of neural controlled differential equations and neural stochastic differential equations, where the neural stochastic differential equations allow for tractable variational Bayesian inference. Thereby, for an assigned sequence of treatments, our BNCDE provides meaningful posterior predictive distributions of the potential outcomes. To the best of our knowledge, ours is the first tailored neural method to provide uncertainty estimates of treatment effects in continuous time. As such, our method is of direct practical value for promoting reliable decision-making in medicine.
Counterfactual inference aims to answer retrospective ''what if'' questions and thus belongs to the most fine-grained type of inference in Pearl's causality ladder. Existing methods for counterfactual inference with continuous outcomes aim at point identification and thus make strong and unnatural assumptions about the underlying structural causal model. In this paper, we relax these assumptions and aim at partial counterfactual identification of continuous outcomes, i.e., when the counterfactual query resides in an ignorance interval with informative bounds. We prove that, in general, the ignorance interval of the counterfactual queries has non-informative bounds, already when functions of structural causal models are continuously differentiable. As a remedy, we propose a novel sensitivity model called Curvature Sensitivity Model. This allows us to obtain informative bounds by bounding the curvature of level sets of the functions. We further show that existing point counterfactual identification methods are special cases of our Curvature Sensitivity Model when the bound of the curvature is set to zero. We then propose an implementation of our Curvature Sensitivity Model in the form of a novel deep generative model, which we call Augmented Pseudo-Invertible Decoder. Our implementation employs (i) residual normalizing flows with (ii) variational augmentations. We empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of our Augmented Pseudo-Invertible Decoder. To the best of our knowledge, ours is the first partial identification model for Markovian structural causal models with continuous outcomes.
Decision-making in personalized medicine such as cancer therapy or critical care must often make choices for dosage combinations, i.e., multiple continuous treatments. Existing work for this task has modeled the effect of multiple treatments independently, while estimating the joint effect has received little attention but comes with non-trivial challenges. In this paper, we propose a novel method for reliable off-policy learning for dosage combinations. Our method proceeds along three steps: (1) We develop a tailored neural network that estimates the individualized dose-response function while accounting for the joint effect of multiple dependent dosages. (2) We estimate the generalized propensity score using conditional normalizing flows in order to detect regions with limited overlap in the shared covariate-treatment space. (3) We present a gradient-based learning algorithm to find the optimal, individualized dosage combinations. Here, we ensure reliable estimation of the policy value by avoiding regions with limited overlap. We finally perform an extensive evaluation of our method to show its effectiveness. To the best of our knowledge, ours is the first work to provide a method for reliable off-policy learning for optimal dosage combinations.
Causal inference from observational data is crucial for many disciplines such as medicine and economics. However, sharp bounds for causal effects under relaxations of the unconfoundedness assumption (causal sensitivity analysis) are subject to ongoing research. So far, works with sharp bounds are restricted to fairly simple settings (e.g., a single binary treatment). In this paper, we propose a unified framework for causal sensitivity analysis under unobserved confounding in various settings. For this, we propose a flexible generalization of the marginal sensitivity model (MSM) and then derive sharp bounds for a large class of causal effects. This includes (conditional) average treatment effects, effects for mediation analysis and path analysis, and distributional effects. Furthermore, our sensitivity model is applicable to discrete, continuous, and time-varying treatments. It allows us to interpret the partial identification problem under unobserved confounding as a distribution shift in the latent confounders while evaluating the causal effect of interest. In the special case of a single binary treatment, our bounds for (conditional) average treatment effects coincide with recent optimality results for causal sensitivity analysis. Finally, we propose a scalable algorithm to estimate our sharp bounds from observational data.
Businesses and organizations must ensure that their algorithmic decision-making is fair in order to meet legislative, ethical, and societal demands. For example, decision-making in automated hiring must not discriminate with respect to gender or race. To achieve this, prior research has contributed approaches that ensure algorithmic fairness in machine learning predictions, while comparatively little effort has focused on algorithmic fairness in decision models, specifically off-policy learning. In this paper, we propose a novel framework for fair off-policy learning: we learn decision rules from observational data under different notions of fairness, where we explicitly assume that observational data were collected under a different -- potentially biased -- behavioral policy. For this, we first formalize different fairness notions for off-policy learning. We then propose a machine learning approach to learn optimal policies under these fairness notions. Specifically, we reformulate the fairness notions into unconstrained learning objectives that can be estimated from finite samples. Here, we leverage machine learning to minimize the objective constrained on a fair representation of the data, so that the resulting policies satisfy our fairness notions. We further provide theoretical guarantees in form of generalization bounds for the finite-sample version of our framework. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework through extensive numerical experiments using both simulated and real-world data. As a result, our work enables algorithmic decision-making in a wide array of practical applications where fairness must ensured.