Covariate balancing using the integral probability metric for causal inference
Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:672UEBRSrecord.jsonopen to challenge →
read the original abstract
Weighting methods in causal inference have been widely used to achieve a desirable level of covariate balancing. However, the existing weighting methods have desirable theoretical properties only when a certain model, either the propensity score or outcome regression model, is correctly specified. In addition, the corresponding estimators do not behave well for finite samples due to large variance even when the model is correctly specified. In this paper, we consider to use the integral probability metric (IPM), which is a metric between two probability measures, for covariate balancing. Optimal weights are determined so that weighted empirical distributions for the treated and control groups have the smallest IPM value for a given set of discriminators. We prove that the corresponding estimator can be consistent without correctly specifying any model (neither the propensity score nor the outcome regression model). In addition, we empirically show that our proposed method outperforms existing weighting methods with large margins for finite samples.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Local Balance Calibration for Nonparametric Propensity Score Estimation
Local Balance with Calibration using neural networks creates propensity score weights that enforce local covariate balance and calibration, yielding more stable weights and lower bias in average treatment effect estim...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.