IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/boc/usug22/07.html

Treatment-effects estimation using lasso

Author

Listed:
  • Di Liu

    (StataCorp)

Abstract

You can use treatment-effects estimators to draw causal inferences from observational data. You can use lasso when you want to control for many potential covariates. With standard treatment-effects models, there is an intrinsic conflict between two required assumptions. The conditional independence assumption is likely to be satisfied with many variables in the model, while the overlap assumption is likely to be satisfied with fewer variables in the model. This presentation shows how to overcome this conflict by using Stata 17's telasso command. telasso estimates the average treatment effects with high-dimensional controls while using lasso for model selection. This estimator is robust to the model-selection mistakes. Moreover, it is doubly robust, so only one of the outcome or treatment model needs to be correctly specified.

Suggested Citation

  • Di Liu, 2022. "Treatment-effects estimation using lasso," 2022 Stata Conference 07, Stata Users Group.
    • Handle: RePEc:boc:usug22:07
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.org/usug2022/US22_Liu.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leeb, Hannes & Pötscher, Benedikt M., 2005. "Model Selection And Inference: Facts And Fiction," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 21-59, February.
    2. 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.
    3. Poterba, James M. & Venti, Steven F. & Wise, David A., 1995. "Do 401(k) contributions crowd out other personal saving?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 1-32, 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. Di Liu, 2022. "Treatment-effects estimation using lasso," Italian Stata Users' Group Meetings 2022 07, Stata Users Group.
    2. Dingke Tang & Dehan Kong & Wenliang Pan & Linbo Wang, 2023. "Ultra‐high dimensional variable selection for doubly robust causal inference," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 903-914, June.
    3. Michael C Knaus & Michael Lechner & Anthony Strittmatter, 2021. "Machine learning estimation of heterogeneous causal effects: Empirical Monte Carlo evidence," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 24(1), pages 134-161.
    4. Ricardo P. Masini & Marcelo C. Medeiros & Eduardo F. Mendes, 2023. "Machine learning advances for time series forecasting," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 76-111, February.
    5. Adamek, Robert & Smeekes, Stephan & Wilms, Ines, 2023. "Lasso inference for high-dimensional time series," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 235(2), pages 1114-1143.
    6. Oliver Dukes & Vahe Avagyan & Stijn Vansteelandt, 2020. "Doubly robust tests of exposure effects under high‐dimensional confounding," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 76(4), pages 1190-1200, December.
    7. Achim Ahrens & Christian B. Hansen & Mark E. Schaffer & Thomas Wiemann, 2025. "Model Averaging and Double Machine Learning," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(3), pages 249-269, April.
    8. Abadie, Alberto & Gu, Jiaying & Shen, Shu, 2024. "Instrumental variable estimation with first-stage heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 240(2).
    9. Kuppelwieser, Thomas & Wozabal, David, 2021. "Liquidity costs on intraday power markets: Continuous trading versus auctions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    10. Sida Peng, 2019. "Heterogeneous Endogenous Effects in Networks," Papers 1908.00663, arXiv.org.
    11. Phillip Heiler, 2022. "Efficient Covariate Balancing for the Local Average Treatment Effect," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 1569-1582, October.
    12. Kaspar Wuthrich & Ying Zhu, 2019. "Omitted variable bias of Lasso-based inference methods: A finite sample analysis," Papers 1903.08704, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2021.
    13. Zeqi Wu & Meilin Wang & Wei Huang & Zheng Zhang, 2025. "A New and Efficient Debiased Estimation of General Treatment Models by Balanced Neural Networks Weighting," Papers 2507.04044, arXiv.org.
    14. Victor Chernozhukov & Juan Carlos Escanciano & Hidehiko Ichimura & Whitney K. Newey & James M. Robins, 2022. "Locally Robust Semiparametric Estimation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(4), pages 1501-1535, July.
    15. Kazuhiko Shinoda & Takahiro Hoshino, 2022. "Orthogonal Series Estimation for the Ratio of Conditional Expectation Functions," Papers 2212.13145, arXiv.org.
    16. Shi, Ruoyao, 2024. "An Averaging Estimator For Two-Step M-Estimation In Semiparametric Models," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(3), pages 652-687, June.
    17. Achim Ahrens & Christian B. Hansen & Mark E. Schaffer & Thomas Wiemann, 2024. "ddml: Double/debiased machine learning in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 24(1), pages 3-45, March.
    18. Guanhao Feng & Stefano Giglio & Dacheng Xiu, 2020. "Taming the Factor Zoo: A Test of New Factors," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 75(3), pages 1327-1370, June.
    19. Hui Lan & Vasilis Syrgkanis, 2023. "Causal Q-Aggregation for CATE Model Selection," Papers 2310.16945, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2025.
    20. Wonder Agbenyo & Yuansheng Jiang & Xinxin Jia & Jingyi Wang & Gideon Ntim-Amo & Rahman Dunya & Anthony Siaw & Isaac Asare & Martinson Ankrah Twumasi, 2022. "Does the Adoption of Climate-Smart Agricultural Practices Impact Farmers’ Income? Evidence from Ghana," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-25, March.

    More about this item

    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:boc:usug22:07. 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: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/stataea.html .

    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.