IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2609.29440.html

Kernel Balancing in Tree-based Methods

Author

Listed:
  • Karolina Gliszczy'nska-Schroeder

Abstract

Studying heterogeneous treatment effects has become essential in experimental and observational studies. A critical assumption for obtaining reliable treatment effect estimates is overlap, which requires that treated and control units have sufficiently similar covariate distributions. Poor overlap may limit the effectiveness of estimators, especially those based on propensity scores, potentially leading to unreliable results. We investigate the effectiveness of kernel balancing (KBal) (Hazlett, 2020) as an alternative to propensity score methods for conditional average treatment effect (CATE) estimation, particularly in settings with overlap violations. Building on optimization-based balancing approaches, we integrate KBal weights into tree-based methods, specifically, causal forests (Athey et al., 2019) and the X-Learner (XRF) (K\"unzel et al., 2019), to assess their impact on bias reduction and estimation precision. Monte Carlo evidence shows that KBal achieves near-exact balance in a transformed feature space, thereby improving treatment effect estimation in cases where traditional reweighting methods struggle due to extreme weights, finite-sample bias, or insufficient removal of pre-existing confounding bias. We apply the proposed methods to the semi-synthetic IHDP benchmark dataset. Overall, the results indicate that KBal leads to performance improvements, especially in settings with nonlinear treatment effects and limited overlap, making it a useful alternative to propensity score methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Karolina Gliszczy'nska-Schroeder, 2026. "Kernel Balancing in Tree-based Methods," Papers 2609.29440, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2609.29440
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.29440
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. José R. Zubizarreta, 2015. "Stable Weights that Balance Covariates for Estimation With Incomplete Outcome Data," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 110(511), pages 910-922, September.
    2. Stefan Wager & Susan Athey, 2018. "Estimation and Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Random Forests," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(523), pages 1228-1242, July.
    3. Richard K. Crump & V. Joseph Hotz & Guido W. Imbens & Oscar A. Mitnik, 2009. "Dealing with limited overlap in estimation of average treatment effects," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 96(1), pages 187-199.
    4. Patrick Rehill, 2025. "How Do Applied Researchers Use the Causal Forest? A Methodological Review," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 93(2), pages 288-316, August.
    5. Yixin Wang & Jose R Zubizarreta, 2020. "Minimal dispersion approximately balancing weights: asymptotic properties and practical considerations," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 107(1), pages 93-105.
    6. 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.
    7. X Nie & S Wager, 2021. "Quasi-oracle estimation of heterogeneous treatment effects [TensorFlow: A system for large-scale machine learning]," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 108(2), pages 299-319.
    8. Donald B. Rubin, 2005. "Causal Inference Using Potential Outcomes: Design, Modeling, Decisions," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 100, pages 322-331, March.
    9. Gabriel Okasa, 2022. "Meta-Learners for Estimation of Causal Effects: Finite Sample Cross-Fit Performance," Papers 2201.12692, arXiv.org.
    10. Keisuke Hirano & Guido W. Imbens & Geert Ridder, 2003. "Efficient Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Using the Estimated Propensity Score," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(4), pages 1161-1189, July.
    11. 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.
    12. Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Exogeneity: A Review," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(1), pages 4-29, February.
    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. Ganesh Karapakula, 2023. "Stable Probability Weighting: Large-Sample and Finite-Sample Estimation and Inference Methods for Heterogeneous Causal Effects of Multivalued Treatments Under Limited Overlap," Papers 2301.05703, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2023.
    2. 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.
    3. Huber, Martin, 2019. "An introduction to flexible methods for policy evaluation," FSES Working Papers 504, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    4. 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.
    5. Dongcheng Zhang & Kunpeng Zhang, 2020. "Weighting-Based Treatment Effect Estimation via Distribution Learning," Papers 2012.13805, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.
    6. Guido Imbens & Yiqing Xu, 2024. "Comparing Experimental and Nonexperimental Methods: What Lessons Have We Learned Four Decades After LaLonde (1986)?," Papers 2406.00827, arXiv.org, revised May 2025.
    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. Kevin P. Josey & Elizabeth Juarez‐Colunga & Fan Yang & Debashis Ghosh, 2021. "A framework for covariate balance using Bregman distances," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 48(3), pages 790-816, September.
    9. Vahe Avagyan & Stijn Vansteelandt, 2021. "Stable inverse probability weighting estimation for longitudinal studies," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 48(3), pages 1046-1067, September.
    10. Shixiao Zhang & Peisong Han & Changbao Wu, 2023. "Calibration Techniques Encompassing Survey Sampling, Missing Data Analysis and Causal Inference," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 91(2), pages 165-192, August.
    11. Hugo Bodory & Lorenzo Camponovo & Martin Huber & Michael Lechner, 2020. "The Finite Sample Performance of Inference Methods for Propensity Score Matching and Weighting Estimators," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1), pages 183-200, January.
    12. 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.
    13. Dmitry Arkhangelsky & David Hirshberg, 2023. "Large-Sample Properties of the Synthetic Control Method under Selection on Unobservables," Papers 2311.13575, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    14. Zhang, Xiaoke & Xue, Wu & Wang, Qiyue, 2021. "Covariate balancing functional propensity score for functional treatments in cross-sectional observational studies," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    15. Hang Miao & Kui Zhao & Zhun Wang & Linbo Jiang & Quanhui Jia & Yanming Fang & Quan Yu, 2020. "Intelligent Credit Limit Management in Consumer Loans Based on Causal Inference," Papers 2007.05188, arXiv.org.
    16. Isaac Meza, 2025. "Residual Balancing for Non-Linear Outcome Models in High Dimensions," Papers 2511.00324, arXiv.org.
    17. Yimin Dai & Ying Yan, 2024. "Mahalanobis balancing: A multivariate perspective on approximate covariate balancing," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 51(4), pages 1450-1471, December.
    18. Athey, Susan & Imbens, Guido W. & Metzger, Jonas & Munro, Evan, 2024. "Using Wasserstein Generative Adversarial Networks for the design of Monte Carlo simulations," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 240(2).
    19. Kitagawa, Toru & Muris, Chris, 2016. "Model averaging in semiparametric estimation of treatment effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 193(1), pages 271-289.
    20. Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna & Xiaojun Song & Qi Xu, 2022. "Covariate distribution balance via propensity scores," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(6), pages 1093-1120, September.

    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:2609.29440. 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.