Stop Suppressing the Tail: Causal Inference for Extreme Events

Estimating how an outcome responds to a continuous treatment (the Average Dose-Response Function, or ADRF) is a core causal-inference primitive. However, when outcomes possess heavy tails, standard robust double machine learning (DML) deliberately suppresses these extremes to stabilize the bulk average. In high-stakes settings, such as financial returns or climate losses, this omitted 1-in-1000 extreme event is the actual target quantity. Furthermore, current methods that read the tail from a model's residuals suffer from circular dependence, causing tail shape inferences to shift drastically based solely on whether the core estimator is switched between Huber and Welsch. The research proposes an ADRF estimator that emits a structured tail-shape output alongside the standard point estimate. Its tail diagnostic (PDHTE+JK) evaluates the per-treatment tail shape from the outcome centered by a pilot median, successfully breaking the circular dependence and rendering the diagnostic invariant to the choice of core method. The output encompasses four treatment-conditional quantities: tail shape $\hatξ(t)$, deep-tail return levels $\hat{Q}_α(t)$, conditional shortfalls $\hat{S}_α(t)$, the recovered mean ADRF, and an explicit refusal mechanism that declines extrapolation when extreme-value modeling is unsupported by the data. Compared to kernel-weighted quantile regression (QR), the proposed estimator reduces deep-tail ($α=0.001$) return-level MAE by 11% and conditional-shortfall MAE by 25.5% across a heavy-tailed panel. It also achieves a 20-29% MAE reduction in sample-scarce regimes ($n\le2000$). On freMTPL2 motor-insurance claims, it successfully triggered an explicit extrapolation refusal on the log-claim scale, which neither QR nor loss-only DML can produce.

Calibrated Inference for the Conditional Average Treatment Effect in the Few-Placebo Regime via Gaussian Processes

Estimating how much an intervention helps a given individual the conditional average treatment effect (CATE) is increasingly central to decision-making in medicine, economics, and policy, where an estimate is most useful when accompanied by a calibrated uncertainty interval. We study the few-placebo regime, in which one treatment arm is much smaller than the other, as arises in unequal-allocation trials and small-holdout $A/B$ tests. The standard estimator in this setting is the X-Learner, and a natural way to obtain credible intervals is to make its second stage Bayesian. We show that these intervals under-cover: they contain the true effect less often than their nominal level. We trace this to a structural cause the X-Learner's regression target inherits the bias of a nuisance model fitted to the small arm, so the posterior is centered away from the true effect and we find that the standard remedy, regressing an orthogonal doubly-robust score, is also unreliable here, since the regime's limited overlap leaves the estimator either highly variable or, once stabilized, biased once more. Both consequences reflect a pattern that extends beyond causal inference: a separately estimated variance is attached to a point estimate of a hard-to-learn quantity, and the point estimate's bias is not captured by that variance. We propose GP-CATE, which models each arm's outcome surface with a Gaussian process, so the scarce arm's uncertainty enters the posterior directly rather than as an unmodelled bias. Across synthetic and semi-synthetic benchmarks, GP-CATE attains calibrated coverage where the estimators we compare against including Causal Forest and BART do not, at the cost of intervals that are appropriately wide when the data are uninformative.

Iterative Causal Discovery: Per-Edge Impossibility Certificates, Tier-Aware Oracle Queries, and the $1+K$ Lower Bound

Causal-discovery algorithms return a directed graph, yet provide no principled means of distinguishing edge directions identified by the data from those assigned without an identifying assumption. Under the standard Markov and faithfulness conditions, the observational distribution identifies only a Markov equivalence class; orientations within that class are not determined by the joint distribution and cannot be recovered from additional samples alone, but require either a functional restriction or an intervention. We introduce a protocol for observational causal discovery on continuous data that attaches to each candidate edge a discrete impossibility certificate: a RESOLVED code records the identifiability theorem under which the direction was committed, while an IMPOSSIBLE code records the failure mode together with the specific question a domain expert must answer to resolve it. The bivariate cascade is extended with five gated identifiability tiers LSNM, IGCI, Stein, MDL, and PEIT that abstain when their precondition test rejects. Two oracle primitives, the meta-hub query and the node-children query, jointly establish an upper bound of $1+K$ expert interactions sufficient to recover any DAG, where $K$ denotes the number of non-leaf vertices. Under an ideal-oracle assumption, the bound is met exactly on the asia, sachs, child, and alarm benchmarks.

Robust X-Learner: Breaking the Curse of Imbalance and Heavy Tails via Robust Cross-Imputation

Estimating Heterogeneous Treatment Effects (HTE) in industrial applications such as AdTech and healthcare presents a dual challenge: extreme class imbalance and heavy-tailed outcome distributions. While the X-Learner framework effectively addresses imbalance through cross-imputation, we demonstrate that it is fundamentally vulnerable to "Outlier Smearing" when reliant on Mean Squared Error (MSE) minimization. In this failure mode, the bias from a few extreme observations ("whales") in the minority group is propagated to the entire majority group during the imputation step, corrupting the estimated treatment effect structure. To resolve this, we propose the Robust X-Learner (RX-Learner). This framework integrates a redescending γ-divergence objective -- structurally equivalent to the Welsch loss under Gaussian assumptions -- into the gradient boosting machinery. We further stabilize the non-convex optimization using a Proxy Hessian strategy grounded in Majorization-Minimization (MM) principles. Empirical evaluation on a semi-synthetic Criteo Uplift dataset demonstrates that the RX-Learner reduces the Precision in Estimation of Heterogeneous Effect (PEHE) metric by 98.6% compared to the standard X-Learner, effectively decoupling the stable "Core" population from the volatile "Periphery".