IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2109.01991.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Optimal transport weights for causal inference

Author

Listed:
  • Eric Dunipace

Abstract

Imbalance in covariate distributions leads to biased estimates of causal effects. Weighting methods attempt to correct this imbalance but rely on specifying models for the treatment assignment mechanism, which is unknown in observational studies. This leaves researchers to choose the proper weighting method and the appropriate covariate functions for these models without knowing the correct combination to achieve distributional balance. In response to these difficulties, we propose a nonparametric generalization of several other weighting schemes found in the literature: Causal Optimal Transport. This new method directly targets distributional balance by minimizing optimal transport distances between treatment and control groups or, more generally, between any source and target population. Our approach is semiparametrically efficient and model-free but can also incorporate moments or any other important functions of covariates that a researcher desires to balance. Moreover, our method can provide nonparametric estimate the conditional mean outcome function and we give rates for the convergence of this estimator. Moreover, we show how this method can provide nonparametric imputations of the missing potential outcomes and give rates of convergence for this estimator. We find that Causal Optimal Transport outperforms competitor methods when both the propensity score and outcome models are misspecified, indicating it is a robust alternative to common weighting methods. Finally, we demonstrate the utility of our method in an external control trial examining the effect of misoprostol versus oxytocin for the treatment of post-partum hemorrhage.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric Dunipace, 2021. "Optimal transport weights for causal inference," Papers 2109.01991, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2109.01991
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2109.01991
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. LaLonde, Robert J, 1986. "Evaluating the Econometric Evaluations of Training Programs with Experimental Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 604-620, September.
    2. Hainmueller, Jens, 2012. "Entropy Balancing for Causal Effects: A Multivariate Reweighting Method to Produce Balanced Samples in Observational Studies," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 25-46, January.
    3. José R. Zubizarreta, 2012. "Using Mixed Integer Programming for Matching in an Observational Study of Kidney Failure After Surgery," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 107(500), pages 1360-1371, December.
    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. Jason J. Sauppe & Sheldon H. Jacobson & Edward C. Sewell, 2014. "Complexity and Approximation Results for the Balance Optimization Subset Selection Model for Causal Inference in Observational Studies," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 547-566, August.
    2. Jason J. Sauppe & Sheldon H. Jacobson, 2017. "The role of covariate balance in observational studies," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 323-344, June.
    3. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens & Stefan Wager, 2018. "Approximate residual balancing: debiased inference of average treatment effects in high dimensions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 80(4), pages 597-623, September.
    4. Pierre Chausse & George Luta, 2017. "Casual Inference using Generalized Empirical Likelihood Methods," Working Papers 1707, University of Waterloo, Department of Economics, revised Dec 2017.
    5. Jens Ruhose & Stephan L. Thomsen & Insa Weilage, 2018. "The Wider Benefits of Adult Learning: Work-Related Training and Social Capital," CESifo Working Paper Series 7268, CESifo.
    6. Marianne BLÉHAUT & Xavier D'HAULTFOEUILLE & Jérémy L'HOUR & Alexandre B. TSYBAKOV, 2020. "An alternative to synthetic control for models with many covariates under sparsity," Working Papers 2020-17, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    7. Guido W. Imbens, 2015. "Matching Methods in Practice: Three Examples," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 50(2), pages 373-419.
    8. María de los Angeles Resa & José R. Zubizarreta, 2020. "Direct and stable weight adjustment in non‐experimental studies with multivalued treatments: analysis of the effect of an earthquake on post‐traumatic stress," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(4), pages 1387-1410, October.
    9. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2017. "The State of Applied Econometrics: Causality and Policy Evaluation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 3-32, Spring.
    10. Stefan Denzler & Jens Ruhose & Stefan C. Wolter, 2022. ""The Double Dividend of Training" - Labor Market Effects of Work-Related Continuous Education in Switzerland," CESifo Working Paper Series 10009, CESifo.
    11. Cousineau, Martin & Verter, Vedat & Murphy, Susan A. & Pineau, Joelle, 2023. "Estimating causal effects with optimization-based methods: A review and empirical comparison," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 304(2), pages 367-380.
    12. Davide Viviano & Jelena Bradic, 2021. "Dynamic covariate balancing: estimating treatment effects over time with potential local projections," Papers 2103.01280, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    13. Brett R. Gordon & Florian Zettelmeyer & Neha Bhargava & Dan Chapsky, 2019. "A Comparison of Approaches to Advertising Measurement: Evidence from Big Field Experiments at Facebook," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(2), pages 193-225, March.
    14. Jens Ruhose & Stephan L. Thomsen & Insa Weilage, 2018. "The Wider Benefits of Adult Learning: Work-Related Training and Social Capital," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 1004, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    15. Georg F. Camehl & C. Katharina Spieß & Kurt Hahlweg, 2019. "Short- and Mid-Term Effects of a Parenting Program on Maternal Well-Being: Evidence for More and Less Advantaged Mothers," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 1062, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    16. Harsh Parikh & Cynthia Rudin & Alexander Volfovsky, 2018. "MALTS: Matching After Learning to Stretch," Papers 1811.07415, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2023.
    17. Adeola Oyenubi & Martin Wittenberg, 2021. "Does the choice of balance-measure matter under genetic matching?," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 489-502, July.
    18. Camehl, Georg & Hahlweg, Kurt & Spieß, C. Katharina, 2018. "The Effects of a Parenting Program on Maternal Well-Being: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181583, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    19. Martin Cousineau & Vedat Verter & Susan A. Murphy & Joelle Pineau, 2022. "Estimating causal effects with optimization-based methods: A review and empirical comparison," Papers 2203.00097, arXiv.org.
    20. Ruhose, Jens & Thomsen, Stephan L. & Weilage, Insa, 2019. "The benefits of adult learning: Work-related training, social capital, and earnings," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 166-186.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2109.01991. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.