IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/econom/v232y2023i2p565-575.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why randomize? Minimax optimality under permutation invariance

Author

Listed:
  • Bai, Yuehao

Abstract

This paper studies finite sample minimax optimal randomization schemes and estimation schemes in estimating parameters including the average treatment effect, when treatment effects are heterogeneous. A randomization scheme is a distribution over a group of permutations of a given treatment assignment vector. An estimation scheme is a joint distribution over assignment vectors, linear estimators, and permutations of assignment vectors. The key element in the minimax problem is that the worst case is over a class of distributions of the data which is invariant to a group of permutations. First, I show that given any assignment vector and any estimator, the uniform distribution over the same group of permutations, namely the complete randomization scheme, is minimax optimal. Second, under further assumptions on the class of distributions and the objective function, I show the minimax optimal estimation scheme involves completely randomizing an assignment vector, while the optimal estimator is the difference-in-means under complete invariance and a weighted average of within-block differences under a block structure, and the number of treated units is determined by the Neyman allocation.

Suggested Citation

  • Bai, Yuehao, 2023. "Why randomize? Minimax optimality under permutation invariance," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 232(2), pages 565-575.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:econom:v:232:y:2023:i:2:p:565-575
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2021.10.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304407621002566
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jeconom.2021.10.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Timothy B. Armstrong & Michal Kolesár, 2018. "Optimal Inference in a Class of Regression Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(2), pages 655-683, March.
    2. Nathan Kallus, 2018. "Optimal a priori balance in the design of controlled experiments," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 80(1), pages 85-112, January.
    3. Kasy, Maximilian, 2016. "Why Experimenters Might Not Always Want to Randomize, and What They Could Do Instead," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(3), pages 324-338, July.
    4. Nathan Kallus, 2021. "On the optimality of randomization in experimental design: How to randomize for minimax variance and design‐based inference," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 83(2), pages 404-409, April.
    5. Miriam Bruhn & David McKenzie, 2009. "In Pursuit of Balance: Randomization in Practice in Development Field Experiments," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(4), pages 200-232, October.
    6. Abhijit V. Banerjee & Sylvain Chassang & Sergio Montero & Erik Snowberg, 2020. "A Theory of Experimenters: Robustness, Randomization, and Balance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(4), pages 1206-1230, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Max Tabord-Meehan, 2018. "Stratification Trees for Adaptive Randomization in Randomized Controlled Trials," Papers 1806.05127, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2022.
    2. Pedro Carneiro & Sokbae Lee & Daniel Wilhelm, 2020. "Optimal data collection for randomized control trials [Microcredit impacts: Evidence from a randomized microcredit program placement experiment by Compartamos Banco]," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 23(1), pages 1-31.
    3. Sven Resnjanskij & Jens Ruhose & Simon Wiederhold & Ludger Woessmann & Katharina Wedel, 2024. "Can Mentoring Alleviate Family Disadvantage in Adolescence? A Field Experiment to Improve Labor Market Prospects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 132(3), pages 1013-1062.
    4. Eszter Czibor & David Jimenez‐Gomez & John A. List, 2019. "The Dozen Things Experimental Economists Should Do (More of)," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 371-432, October.
    5. Riener, Gerhard & Schneider, Sebastian & Wagner, Valentin, 2020. "Addressing validity and generalizability concerns in field experiments," DICE Discussion Papers 345, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    6. Karthik Muralidharan & Mauricio Romero & Kaspar Wüthrich, 2019. "Factorial Designs, Model Selection, and (Incorrect) Inference in Randomized Experiments," NBER Working Papers 26562, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Abhijit Banerjee & Sylvain Chassang & Sergio Montero & Erik Snowberg, 2017. "A Theory of Experimenters," CESifo Working Paper Series 6678, CESifo.
    8. Fryer, Roland G., 2016. "Information, non-financial incentives, and student achievement: Evidence from a text messaging experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 109-121.
    9. Christina Korting & Carl Lieberman & Jordan Matsudaira & Zhuan Pei & Yi Shen, 2023. "Visual Inference and Graphical Representation in Regression Discontinuity Designs," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(3), pages 1977-2019.
    10. Esposito Acosta,Bruno Nicola & Sautmann,Anja, 2022. "Adaptive Experiments for Policy Choice : Phone Calls for Home Reading in Kenya," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10098, The World Bank.
    11. Ke Zhu & Hanzhong Liu, 2023. "Pair‐switching rerandomization," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 2127-2142, September.
    12. Drazen, Allan & Dreber, Anna & Ozbay, Erkut Y. & Snowberg, Erik, 2021. "Journal-based replication of experiments: An application to “Being Chosen to Lead”," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    13. Zhao, Anqi & Ding, Peng, 2021. "Covariate-adjusted Fisher randomization tests for the average treatment effect," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 225(2), pages 278-294.
    14. Abhijit Banerjee & Sylvain Chassang & Erik Snowberg, 2016. "Decision Theoretic Approaches to Experiment Design and External Validity," NBER Working Papers 22167, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Aufenanger, Tobias, 2017. "Machine learning to improve experimental design," FAU Discussion Papers in Economics 16/2017, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Institute for Economics, revised 2017.
    16. Aufenanger, Tobias, 2018. "Treatment allocation for linear models," FAU Discussion Papers in Economics 14/2017, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Institute for Economics, revised 2018.
    17. Max Cytrynbaum, 2021. "Optimal Stratification of Survey Experiments," Papers 2111.08157, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2023.
    18. Sylvain Chassang & Rong Feng, 2020. "The Cost of Imbalance in Clinical Trials," Working Papers 2020-12, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    19. Roland G. Fryer, Jr, 2013. "Information and Student Achievement: Evidence from a Cellular Phone Experiment," NBER Working Papers 19113, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Pedro Carneiro & Sokbae (Simon) Lee & Daniel Wilhelm, 2017. "Optimal data collection for randomized control trials," CeMMAP working papers 45/17, Institute for Fiscal Studies.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Experimental design; Permutation invariance; Minimax optimality; Average treatment effect;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C13 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Estimation: General
    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:econom:v:232:y:2023:i:2:p:565-575. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jeconom .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.