IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2201.12936.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Pigeonhole Design: Balancing Sequential Experiments from an Online Matching Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Jinglong Zhao
  • Zijie Zhou

Abstract

Practitioners and academics have long appreciated the benefits of covariate balancing when they conduct randomized experiments. For web-facing firms running online A/B tests, however, it still remains challenging in balancing covariate information when experimental subjects arrive sequentially. In this paper, we study an online experimental design problem, which we refer to as the "Online Blocking Problem." In this problem, experimental subjects with heterogeneous covariate information arrive sequentially and must be immediately assigned into either the control or the treated group. The objective is to minimize the total discrepancy, which is defined as the minimum weight perfect matching between the two groups. To solve this problem, we propose a randomized design of experiment, which we refer to as the "Pigeonhole Design." The pigeonhole design first partitions the covariate space into smaller spaces, which we refer to as pigeonholes, and then, when the experimental subjects arrive at each pigeonhole, balances the number of control and treated subjects for each pigeonhole. We analyze the theoretical performance of the pigeonhole design and show its effectiveness by comparing against two well-known benchmark designs: the match-pair design and the completely randomized design. We identify scenarios when the pigeonhole design demonstrates more benefits over the benchmark design. To conclude, we conduct extensive simulations using Yahoo! data to show a 10.2% reduction in variance if we use the pigeonhole design to estimate the average treatment effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Jinglong Zhao & Zijie Zhou, 2022. "Pigeonhole Design: Balancing Sequential Experiments from an Online Matching Perspective," Papers 2201.12936, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2201.12936
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.12936
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nikhil Bhat & Vivek F. Farias & Ciamac C. Moallemi & Deeksha Sinha, 2020. "Near-Optimal A-B Testing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(10), pages 4477-4495, October.
    2. Lu, Bo & Greevy, Robert & Xu, Xinyi & Beck, Cole, 2011. "Optimal Nonbipartite Matching and Its Statistical Applications," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 65(1), pages 21-30.
    3. Ruoxuan Xiong & Susan Athey & Mohsen Bayati & Guido Imbens, 2019. "Optimal Experimental Design for Staggered Rollouts," Papers 1911.03764, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    4. Rembrand Koning & Sharique Hasan & Aaron Chatterji, 2019. "Experimentation and Startup Performance: Evidence from A/B testing," NBER Working Papers 26278, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Patrick Jaillet & Xin Lu, 2014. "Online Stochastic Matching: New Algorithms with Better Bounds," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 39(3), pages 624-646, August.
    6. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881.
    7. Dimitris Bertsimas & Mac Johnson & Nathan Kallus, 2015. "The Power of Optimization Over Randomization in Designing Experiments Involving Small Samples," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 63(4), pages 868-876, August.
    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. Jinglong Zhao, 2023. "Adaptive Neyman Allocation," Papers 2309.08808, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    2. Athey, Susan & Imbens, Guido W., 2022. "Design-based analysis in Difference-In-Differences settings with staggered adoption," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 226(1), pages 62-79.
    3. Iavor Bojinov & David Simchi-Levi & Jinglong Zhao, 2023. "Design and Analysis of Switchback Experiments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(7), pages 3759-3777, July.
    4. Patrick Bajari & Brian Burdick & Guido W. Imbens & Lorenzo Masoero & James McQueen & Thomas Richardson & Ido M. Rosen, 2021. "Multiple Randomization Designs," Papers 2112.13495, arXiv.org.
    5. Shan Huang & Chen Wang & Yuan Yuan & Jinglong Zhao & Jingjing Zhang, 2023. "Estimating Effects of Long-Term Treatments," Papers 2308.08152, arXiv.org.
    6. Zhang, Yuyang & Schnell, Patrick & Song, Chi & Huang, Bin & Lu, Bo, 2021. "Subgroup causal effect identification and estimation via matching tree," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    7. Sven Resnjanskij & Jens Ruhose & Simon Wiederhold & Ludger Wößmann, 2021. "Mentoring Improves the Labor-Market Prospects of Highly Disadvantaged Adolescents," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 74(02), pages 31-38, February.
    8. Alexandre Belloni & Victor Chernozhukov & Denis Chetverikov & Christian Hansen & Kengo Kato, 2018. "High-dimensional econometrics and regularized GMM," CeMMAP working papers CWP35/18, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    9. Dimitris Bertsimas & Agni Orfanoudaki & Rory B. Weiner, 2020. "Personalized treatment for coronary artery disease patients: a machine learning approach," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 482-506, December.
    10. Clément de Chaisemartin & Jaime Ramirez-Cuellar, 2024. "At What Level Should One Cluster Standard Errors in Paired and Small-Strata Experiments?," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 193-212, January.
    11. Clément de Chaisemartin & Luc Behaghel, 2020. "Estimating the Effect of Treatments Allocated by Randomized Waiting Lists," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(4), pages 1453-1477, July.
    12. Bruno Ferman & Cristine Pinto & Vitor Possebom, 2020. "Cherry Picking with Synthetic Controls," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(2), pages 510-532, March.
    13. Bonesrønning, Hans & Finseraas, Henning & Hardoy, Ines & Iversen, Jon Marius Vaag & Nyhus, Ole Henning & Opheim, Vibeke & Salvanes, Kari Vea & Sandsør, Astrid Marie Jorde & Schøne, Pål, 2022. "Small-group instruction to improve student performance in mathematics in early grades: Results from a randomized field experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    14. Peydró, José-Luis & Jiménez, Gabriel & Kenan, Huremovic & Moral-Benito, Enrique & Vega-Redondo, Fernando, 2020. "Production and financial networks in interplay: Crisis evidence from supplier-customer and credit registers," CEPR Discussion Papers 15277, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Ruoxuan Xiong & Allison Koenecke & Michael Powell & Zhu Shen & Joshua T. Vogelstein & Susan Athey, 2021. "Federated Causal Inference in Heterogeneous Observational Data," Papers 2107.11732, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    16. Marie Bjørneby & Annette Alstadsæter & Kjetil Telle, 2018. "Collusive tax evasion by employers and employees. Evidence from a randomized fi eld experiment in Norway," Discussion Papers 891, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    17. Konrad Menzel, 2021. "Structural Sieves," Papers 2112.01377, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    18. 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.
    19. Alberto Abadie & Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2020. "Sampling‐Based versus Design‐Based Uncertainty in Regression Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 265-296, January.
    20. Andrés Elberg & Pedro M. Gardete & Rosario Macera & Carlos Noton, 2019. "Dynamic effects of price promotions: field evidence, consumer search, and supply-side implications," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 1-58, March.

    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:2201.12936. 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.