IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2609.17296.html

Conformal Policy Learning with Distribution-Free Safety Guarantees

Author

Listed:
  • Ying Jin
  • Naoki Egami

Abstract

Policy learning aims to determine who should be treated based on individual characteristics. In high-stakes settings such as medicine and public policy where safety is a central concern, improving the average outcomes alone may not be sufficient: decision makers may also seek to protect individuals from harm, in line with the Hippocratic principle of ``do no harm.'' In this paper, we propose \textit{conformal policy learning} (CPL), a policy learning procedure with a new distribution-free safety guarantee that controls the probability of assigning treatment to an individual who would be harmed relative to control. CPL views each treatment decision as testing a hypothesis of counterfactual harm and assigns treatment by thresholding conformal p-values. These p-values use observable proxies and selective calibration to address the challenge that the potential outcomes under comparison are never simultaneously observed. For randomized experiments, under standard exchangeability conditions, CPL provides finite-sample safety guarantee at a user-specified level, without imposing any outcome modeling assumptions. Moreover, when the outcome model is consistently estimated, CPL achieves asymptotically optimal welfare subject to the safety constraint. In observational studies, CPL with learn-then-balance weights achieves doubly robust safety guarantees. We evaluate CPL through extensive simulations and apply it to an empirical study of AI-powered interventions designed to reduce conspiracy beliefs.

Suggested Citation

  • Ying Jin & Naoki Egami, 2026. "Conformal Policy Learning with Distribution-Free Safety Guarantees," Papers 2609.17296, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2609.17296
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.17296
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yingqi Zhao & Donglin Zeng & A. John Rush & Michael R. Kosorok, 2012. "Estimating Individualized Treatment Rules Using Outcome Weighted Learning," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 107(499), pages 1106-1118, September.
    2. Imai, Kosuke & Strauss, Aaron, 2011. "Estimation of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects from Randomized Experiments, with Application to the Optimal Planning of the Get-Out-the-Vote Campaign," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 1-19, January.
    3. Changyu Shen & Jaesik Jeong & Xiaochun Li & Peng-Sheng Chen & Alfred Buxton, 2013. "Treatment Benefit and Treatment Harm Rate to Characterize Heterogeneity in Treatment Effect," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(3), pages 724-731, September.
    4. Toru Kitagawa & Aleksey Tetenov, 2018. "Who Should Be Treated? Empirical Welfare Maximization Methods for Treatment Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(2), pages 591-616, March.
    5. 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.
    6. Eli Ben-Michael & D. James Greiner & Kosuke Imai & Zhichao Jiang, 2025. "Safe Policy Learning through Extrapolation: Application to Pre-trial Risk Assessment," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 120(551), pages 1386-1399, July.
    7. Mingzhang Yin & Claudia Shi & Yixin Wang & David M. Blei, 2024. "Conformal Sensitivity Analysis for Individual Treatment Effects," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 119(545), pages 122-135, January.
    8. Yuanjia Wang & Haoda Fu & Donglin Zeng, 2018. "Learning Optimal Personalized Treatment Rules in Consideration of Benefit and Risk: With an Application to Treating Type 2 Diabetes Patients With Insulin Therapies," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(521), pages 1-13, January.
    9. Zhiwei Zhang & Chenguang Wang & Lei Nie & Guoxing Soon, 2013. "Assessing the heterogeneity of treatment effects via potential outcomes of individual patients," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 62(5), pages 687-704, November.
    10. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey Smith & Nancy Clements, 1997. "Making The Most Out Of Programme Evaluations and Social Experiments: Accounting For Heterogeneity in Programme Impacts," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(4), pages 487-535.
    11. Eli Ben-Michael & Kosuke Imai & Zhichao Jiang, 2024. "Policy Learning with Asymmetric Counterfactual Utilities," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 119(548), pages 3045-3058, October.
    12. Imbens,Guido W. & Rubin,Donald B., 2015. "Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521885881, June.
    13. Victor Chernozhukov & Denis Chetverikov & Mert Demirer & Esther Duflo & Christian Hansen & Whitney Newey & James Robins, 2018. "Double/debiased machine learning for treatment and structural parameters," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 21(1), pages 1-68, February.
    14. Egami, Naoki & Hartman, Erin, 2023. "Elements of External Validity: Framework, Design, and Analysis," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 117(3), pages 1070-1088, August.
    15. Jing Lei & Max G’Sell & Alessandro Rinaldo & Ryan J. Tibshirani & Larry Wasserman, 2018. "Distribution-Free Predictive Inference for Regression," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(523), pages 1094-1111, July.
    16. Susan Athey & Stefan Wager, 2021. "Policy Learning With Observational Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 133-161, January.
    17. S. A. Murphy, 2003. "Optimal dynamic treatment regimes," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 65(2), pages 331-355, May.
    18. Keisuke Hirano & Jack R. Porter, 2009. "Asymptotics for Statistical Treatment Rules," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(5), pages 1683-1701, September.
    19. Lihua Lei & Emmanuel J. Candès, 2021. "Conformal inference of counterfactuals and individual treatment effects," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 83(5), pages 911-938, November.
    20. Charles F. Manski, 2004. "Statistical Treatment Rules for Heterogeneous Populations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(4), pages 1221-1246, July.
    21. Ying Huang & Peter B. Gilbert & Holly Janes, 2012. "Assessing Treatment-Selection Markers using a Potential Outcomes Framework," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(3), pages 687-696, September.
    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. Feng, Kai & Hong, Han & Nekipelov, Denis, 2026. "Statistical inference of optimal allocations I: Regularities and their implications," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 254(PB).
    2. Augustine Denteh & Helge Liebert, 2022. "Who Increases Emergency Department Use? New Insights from the Oregon Health Insurance Experiment," CESifo Working Paper Series 9664, CESifo.
    3. Justin Whitehouse & Qizhao Chen & Morgane Austern & Vasilis Syrgkanis, 2025. "Inference on Optimal Policy Values and Other Irregular Functionals via Softmax Smoothing," Papers 2507.11780, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2026.
    4. Nan Liu & Yanbo Liu & Yuya Sasaki & Yuanyuan Wan, 2025. "Nonparametric Uniform Inference in Binary Classification and Policy Values," Working Papers tecipa-811, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    5. Ayush Sawarni & Jikai Jin & Justin Whitehouse & Vasilis Syrgkanis, 2025. "Policy Learning with Abstention," Papers 2510.19672, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2026.
    6. Achim Ahrens & Alessandra Stampi‐Bombelli & Selina Kurer & Dominik Hangartner, 2024. "Optimal multi‐action treatment allocation: A two‐phase field experiment to boost immigrant naturalization," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(7), pages 1379-1395, November.
    7. Davide Viviano, 2019. "Policy Targeting under Network Interference," Papers 1906.10258, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    8. Daniel F. Pellatt, 2022. "PAC-Bayesian Treatment Allocation Under Budget Constraints," Papers 2212.09007, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2023.
    9. Kirill Ponomarev & Liqiang Shi, 2026. "Adaptive welfare maximization," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 77(2), pages 289-331, April.
    10. Christopher Adjaho & Timothy Christensen, 2022. "Externally Valid Policy Choice," Papers 2205.05561, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2025.
    11. Cheaheon Lim & Yechan Park, 2026. "Dynamically Consistent Statistical Decisions," Papers 2607.10519, arXiv.org.
    12. Yuchen Hu & Henry Zhu & Emma Brunskill & Stefan Wager, 2024. "Minimax-Regret Sample Selection in Randomized Experiments," Papers 2403.01386, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    13. Martin Huber & Jannis Kueck & Mara Mattes, 2026. "Learning and Testing Exposure Mappings of Interference using Graph Convolutional Autoencoder," Papers 2601.05728, arXiv.org.
    14. Susan Athey & Stefan Wager, 2021. "Policy Learning With Observational Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 133-161, January.
    15. Weibin Mo & Yufeng Liu, 2022. "Efficient learning of optimal individualized treatment rules for heteroscedastic or misspecified treatment‐free effect models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 84(2), pages 440-472, April.
    16. Michael C Knaus, 2022. "Double machine learning-based programme evaluation under unconfoundedness [Econometric methods for program evaluation]," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 25(3), pages 602-627.
    17. Shosei Sakaguchi, 2021. "Estimation of Optimal Dynamic Treatment Assignment Rules under Policy Constraints," Papers 2106.05031, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2024.
    18. Henrika Langen & Martin Huber, 2023. "How causal machine learning can leverage marketing strategies: Assessing and improving the performance of a coupon campaign," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(1), pages 1-37, January.
    19. Nora Bearth & Michael Lechner & Jana Mareckova & Fabian Muny, 2025. "Fairness-Aware and Interpretable Policy Learning," Papers 2509.12119, arXiv.org.
    20. Yiyan Huang & Cheuk Hang Leung & Qi Wu & Zhiheng Zhang, 2026. "Wasserstein Policy Learning for Distributional Outcomes," Papers 2606.19117, arXiv.org.

    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:2609.17296. 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: https://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.