K-Fold Causal BART for CATE Estimation
This research aims to propose and evaluate a novel model named K-Fold Causal Bayesian Additive Regression Trees (K-Fold Causal BART) for improved estimation of Average Treatment Effects (ATE) and Conditional Average Treatment Effects (CATE). The study employs synthetic and semi-synthetic datasets, i...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | This research aims to propose and evaluate a novel model named K-Fold Causal
Bayesian Additive Regression Trees (K-Fold Causal BART) for improved estimation
of Average Treatment Effects (ATE) and Conditional Average Treatment Effects
(CATE). The study employs synthetic and semi-synthetic datasets, including the
widely recognized Infant Health and Development Program (IHDP) benchmark
dataset, to validate the model's performance. Despite promising results in
synthetic scenarios, the IHDP dataset reveals that the proposed model is not
state-of-the-art for ATE and CATE estimation. Nonetheless, the research
provides several novel insights: 1. The ps-BART model is likely the preferred
choice for CATE and ATE estimation due to better generalization compared to the
other benchmark models - including the Bayesian Causal Forest (BCF) model,
which is considered by many the current best model for CATE estimation, 2. The
BCF model's performance deteriorates significantly with increasing treatment
effect heterogeneity, while the ps-BART model remains robust, 3. Models tend to
be overconfident in CATE uncertainty quantification when treatment effect
heterogeneity is low, 4. A second K-Fold method is unnecessary for avoiding
overfitting in CATE estimation, as it adds computational costs without
improving performance, 5. Detailed analysis reveals the importance of
understanding dataset characteristics and using nuanced evaluation methods, 6.
The conclusion of Curth et al. (2021) that indirect strategies for CATE
estimation are superior for the IHDP dataset is contradicted by the results of
this research. These findings challenge existing assumptions and suggest
directions for future research to enhance causal inference methodologies. |
---|---|
DOI: | 10.48550/arxiv.2409.05665 |