pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.12317 · v1 · pith:BCTCYVZEnew · submitted 2026-06-10 · 📊 stat.ME · stat.CO

ShrinkageTrees: An R Package for Bayesian Tree Ensembles for Survival Analysis and Causal Inference

Tijn Jacobs This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 08:35 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📊 stat.ME stat.CO
keywords Bayesian additive regression treessurvival analysiscausal inferencehorseshoe priorR packageaccelerated failure timeregularizationhigh-dimensional data
0
0 comments X

The pith

ShrinkageTrees is the first R package to implement the Horseshoe Forest for regularized Bayesian tree ensembles in survival analysis and causal inference.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper presents ShrinkageTrees, an R package that fits Bayesian additive regression tree models to right- and interval-censored survival data inside an accelerated failure time framework. It supplies two complementary regularization approaches: depth-penalising and Dirichlet splitting priors on tree structure, plus global-local shrinkage priors on step heights, with the horseshoe prior featured in the Horseshoe Forest. The package also supports decomposition into prognostic and treatment-effect parts for causal inference. An efficient Rcpp backend, multi-chain MCMC, and standard S3 methods cover the full workflow from fitting through prediction and diagnostics. A sympathetic reader would care because these tools make Bayesian tree ensembles practical for high-dimensional survival problems where unregularized models tend to overfit.

Core claim

ShrinkageTrees provides the first implementation of the Horseshoe Forest, which places a horseshoe prior on the step heights of Bayesian additive regression trees, together with structure-regularising priors, thereby extending Bayesian tree ensembles to high-dimensional settings for survival analysis and causal inference under the accelerated failure time model.

What carries the argument

The Horseshoe Forest, which places a horseshoe prior on the step heights, combined with depth-penalising priors and Dirichlet splitting priors for tree structure.

If this is right

  • The package handles both right-censored and interval-censored survival outcomes.
  • It supports optional decomposition into prognostic and treatment-effect components for causal inference.
  • An efficient Rcpp backend together with multi-chain MCMC and S3 methods covers fitting, prediction, causal effect estimation, and convergence diagnostics.
  • The regularization strategies are presented as the means to extend Bayesian tree ensembles to high-dimensional data.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • This implementation could be applied to clinical datasets with dozens of covariates to test whether the shrinkage reduces overfitting relative to unregularized BART variants.
  • Direct comparisons on public survival benchmarks against penalized Cox models or random survival forests would clarify practical gains.
  • Future work might add support for left censoring or time-varying covariates while retaining the same prior structure.
  • The causal inference module could be linked to existing R packages for doubly robust estimation to check consistency of treatment effect estimates.

Load-bearing premise

The accelerated failure time framework combined with the chosen tree priors is assumed to be flexible enough and sufficiently regularized to produce reliable inferences in high-dimensional survival data without further validation or comparison to alternative survival models.

What would settle it

A simulation study on high-dimensional survival data with known ground truth that shows the fitted models yield systematically biased survival predictions or causal effect estimates would falsify the claim of reliable extension to high-dimensional settings.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.12317 by Tijn Jacobs.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Population-averaged posterior survival curve under the standard BART baseline (solid line) with 95% credible band (shaded) and Kaplan–Meier estimate (dashed). library(survival) c_train <- concordance(Surv(time, status) ~ fit_bart$train_predictions) cat("Train C-index:", round(c_train$concordance, 3), "\n") Train C-index (SurvivalBART): 0.989 The training C-index is close to one: standard BART discriminates… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Schematic of a single regression tree. Interior nodes contain binary splitting rules of the form xρ < c; terminal nodes (leaves) contain step heights hℓ. An observation traverses the tree from root to leaf, and its prediction is the step height of the leaf it reaches. Each tree j is characterised by two groups of parameters. The tree structure Tj encodes the topology and the splitting rules: which variable… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Regularisation landscape for ShrinkageTrees. Solid cells name the fitting function and prior_type value exposed in the package. Dashed cells mark combinations within the framework that the current release does not expose. instead places a Dirichlet prior on the splitting probabilities s = (s1, . . . , sp): s ∼ Dirichlet θ p , . . . , θ p  . (4) Smaller values of θ concentrate the prior on sparse probabil… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The τ -learner decomposition in ShrinkageTrees. The outcome splits into a prognostic forest µ(x, eˆ(x)) (blue) and a treatment-effect forest τ (x) (orange). Each box lists the function arguments that control the forest. For survival outcomes, set yi = log Ti. The τ -learner for causal inference BART has become a popular tool for causal inference (Hill, 2011; Dorie et al., 2019). The BART formulation in equ… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Left: traceplot of the posterior draws of σ for the Horseshoe Forest model. Right: posterior density of σ, estimated separately for each of the four chains. We illustrate the posterior predictive survival curve for a randomly selected patient. pred <- predict(fit_horse, newdata = X) idx <- sample(length(pred$mean), 1) The individual posterior survival curve under the AFT log-normal model S(t | x) = 1−Φ((lo… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Posterior survival curve for a randomly selected patient under the Horseshoe Forest, with pointwise 95% credible bands. CausalShrinkageForest model summary ===================================== Call: CausalHorseForest(y = log(time), status = status, X_train_control = X_control, X_train_treat = X, treatment_indicator_train = treatment, outcome_type = "right-censored", timescale = "log", number_of_trees = 20… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Left: posterior density of the average treatment effect (ATE) of carboplatin versus cisplatin on the log-survival scale, with 95% credible interval (dashed lines). Right: patient-level conditional average treatment effects (CATEs) sorted by posterior mean with 95% credible intervals. The dashed line marks zero (no effect). plot(fit_causal, type = "ate") plot(fit_causal, type = "cate") [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:fig… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Package architecture. The R layer (top) handles input validation, preprocessing, hyperparameter calibration, S3 construction, and post-processing methods. The C++ backend (middle) runs the outer Gibbs sampler, dispatching to the reversible-jump Forest class or the conjugate birth–death StanForest class depending on the step height prior. The ScaleMixture wrapper selects one of four EtaPrior subclasses at r… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Wall-clock seconds vs sample size n for the four fitting functions, with p = 100 and m = 200 held fixed and n_chains = 4 throughout. Lines and points show means over three replications. Shaded ribbons show ±1 SD. 6 Related packages Several R packages implement Bayesian tree ensembles. We review five comparator packages and contrast their capabilities with ShrinkageTrees [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

ShrinkageTrees is an R package for Bayesian tree ensembles in survival analysis and causal inference. The package implements Bayesian additive regression tree models for right- and interval-censored survival outcomes within an accelerated failure time (AFT) framework, with optional decomposition into prognostic and treatment-effect components for causal inference. Two complementary forms of regularisation are available: regularisation of the tree structure, via depth-penalising priors and Dirichlet splitting priors, and regularisation of the step heights, via global-local shrinkage priors. ShrinkageTrees provides the first implementation of the Horseshoe Forest, which places a horseshoe prior on the step heights. These regularisation strategies extend Bayesian tree ensembles to high-dimensional settings. An efficient Rcpp backend, multi-chain MCMC, and S3 methods support the full workflow: fitting, prediction, causal effect estimation, and convergence diagnostics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript describes ShrinkageTrees, an R package implementing Bayesian additive regression tree (BART) models for right- and interval-censored survival outcomes in an accelerated failure time (AFT) framework. It supports optional decomposition into prognostic and treatment-effect components for causal inference, with two forms of regularization: tree-structure regularization via depth-penalizing and Dirichlet splitting priors, and step-height regularization via global-local shrinkage priors including the first implementation of the Horseshoe Forest. The package features an efficient Rcpp backend, multi-chain MCMC, and S3 methods for the full workflow including fitting, prediction, causal effect estimation, and convergence diagnostics.

Significance. If the implementation performs as described, the package would provide a useful extension of existing BART methods by making available regularization strategies (particularly the Horseshoe Forest) that target high-dimensional survival and causal inference problems. This could enable more reliable inference in settings where standard tree ensembles overfit, building directly on prior BART literature without introducing new theoretical derivations.

minor comments (3)
  1. The abstract asserts that the regularization strategies 'extend Bayesian tree ensembles to high-dimensional settings,' but the manuscript provides no simulation studies, real-data benchmarks, or comparisons to existing survival BART implementations (e.g., in the BART or dbarts packages) to support this claim; adding at least one illustrative example or benchmark table would strengthen the paper.
  2. The description of the Horseshoe Forest as the 'first implementation' would benefit from an explicit citation to the originating work on horseshoe priors in tree ensembles to allow readers to trace the novelty.
  3. Consider adding a dedicated section or vignette reference detailing installation instructions, a minimal reproducible example for AFT survival fitting, and output interpretation for causal effect estimates.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive summary of the ShrinkageTrees manuscript, the assessment of its significance for extending BART methods to high-dimensional survival and causal settings, and the recommendation of minor revision. No major comments were listed in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The document is a package announcement describing an implementation of existing BART models within the standard AFT framework, augmented by known regularization techniques (depth-penalizing priors, Dirichlet splitting, horseshoe priors on step heights). No derivation chain, theorems, or new empirical predictions are advanced; the central claim is simply the provision of the first software implementation of the Horseshoe Forest. No equations, self-citations, or fitted quantities are presented that reduce to their own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are specified in the abstract; the work is a software packaging of existing Bayesian tree methods.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5668 in / 1111 out tokens · 17928 ms · 2026-06-27T08:35:04.593359+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

21 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Caron, G

    doi: 10.1111/rssa.12824. [p1, 6] C. M. Carvalho, N. G. Polson, and J. G. Scott. The horseshoe estimator for sparse signals.Biometrika, 97(2):465–480,

    work page doi:10.1111/rssa.12824

  2. [2]

    [p1, 5] H

    doi: 10.1093/biomet/asq017. [p1, 5] H. A. Chipman, E. I. George, and R. E. McCulloch. Bayesian CART model search.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 93(443):935–948,

    work page doi:10.1093/biomet/asq017

  3. [3]

    Jack , journal =

    doi: 10.1080/01621459.1998.10473750. [p4] 15 H. A. Chipman, E. I. George, and R. E. McCulloch. BART: Bayesian additive regression trees.The Annals of Applied Statistics, 4(1):266–298,

    work page doi:10.1080/01621459.1998.10473750 1998

  4. [4]

    [p1, 2, 3, 4] V

    doi: 10.1214/09-AOAS285. [p1, 2, 3, 4] V. Dorie, J. Hill, U. Shalit, M. Scott, and D. Cervone. Automated versus do-it-yourself methods for causal inference: Lessons learned from a data analysis competition.Statistical Science, 34(1): 43–68,

    work page doi:10.1214/09-aoas285

  5. [5]

    doi: 10.1214/18-STS667. [p6] V. Dorie, H. Chipman, and R. McCulloch.dbarts: Discrete Bayesian additive regression trees sampler,

    work page doi:10.1214/18-sts667

  6. [6]

    [p1, 11] J

    doi: 10.18637/jss.v040.i08. [p1, 11] J. H. Friedman. Multivariate adaptive regression splines.The Annals of Statistics, 19(1):1–67,

    work page doi:10.18637/jss.v040.i08

  7. [7]

    doi: 10.1214/aos/1176347963. [p10] P. R. Hahn, J. S. Murray, and C. M. Carvalho. Bayesian regression tree models for causal inference: Regularization, confounding, and heterogeneous effects.Bayesian Analysis, 15(3):965–1056,

    work page doi:10.1214/aos/1176347963

  8. [8]

    [p1, 6, 14] F.E.Harrell, K.L.Lee, andD.B.Mark

    doi: 10.1214/19-BA1195. [p1, 6, 14] F.E.Harrell, K.L.Lee, andD.B.Mark. Multivariableprognosticmodels: Issuesindevelopingmodels, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.Statistics in Medicine, 15(4):361–387,

    work page doi:10.1214/19-ba1195

  9. [9]

    doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19960229)15:4<361::AID-SIM168>3.0.CO;2-4. [p2] T. Hastie and R. Tibshirani. Bayesian backfitting (with comments and a rejoinder by the authors). Statistical Science, 15(3):196–223,

    work page doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19960229)15:4

  10. [10]

    doi: 10.1214/ss/1009212815. [p6] J. He, S. Yalov, and P. R. Hahn. XBART: Accelerated Bayesian additive regression trees. InPro- ceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (AISTATS), volume 89, pages 1130–1138,

    work page doi:10.1214/ss/1009212815

  11. [11]

    doi: 10.1198/jcgs.2010.08162. [p6] T. Jacobs, W. N. van Wieringen, and S. L. van der Pas. Horseshoe forests for high-dimensional causal survival analysis.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.22004,

    work page doi:10.1198/jcgs.2010.08162 2010

  12. [12]

    Horseshoe Forests for High-Dimensional Causal Survival Analysis

    doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2507.22004. Accepted for publication inBayesian Analysis. [p1, 3, 5, 7, 15] A. Kapelner and J. Bleich. bartMachine: Machine learning with Bayesian additive regression trees. Journal of Statistical Software, 70(4):1–40,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.22004

  13. [13]

    doi: 10.18637/jss.v070.i04. [p6] F. Li, P. Ding, and F. Mealli. Bayesian causal inference: A critical review.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 381(2247):20220153,

    work page doi:10.18637/jss.v070.i04

  14. [14]

    doi: 10.1098/rsta.2022.0153. [p9] A. R. Linero. Bayesian regression trees for high-dimensional prediction and variable selection. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 113(522):626–636,

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2022.0153 2022

  15. [15]

    1995.10476572

    doi: 10.1080/01621459. 2016.1264957. [p1, 3, 4, 5] A. R. Linero and Y. Yang. Bayesian regression tree ensembles that adapt to smoothness and sparsity. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 80(5):1087–1110,

    work page doi:10.1080/01621459 2016

  16. [16]

    doi: 10.1111/rssb.12293. [p14] M. Plummer, N. Best, K. Cowles, and K. Vines. CODA: Convergence diagnosis and output analysis for MCMC.R News, 6(1):7–11,

    work page doi:10.1111/rssb.12293

  17. [17]

    [p5] R Core Team.R: A language and environment for statistical computing

    doi: 10.1214/12-BA730. [p5] R Core Team.R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria,

    work page doi:10.1214/12-ba730

  18. [18]

    doi: 10.1214/ aos/1176345338. [p9] R. Sparapani, C. Spanbauer, and R. McCulloch. Nonparametric machine learning and efficient computation with Bayesian additive regression trees: The BART R package.Journal of Statistical Software, 97(1):1–66,

    arXiv

  19. [19]

    [p14] The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network

    doi: 10.18637/jss.v097.i01. [p14] The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature, 474:609–615,

    work page doi:10.18637/jss.v097.i01

  20. [20]

    [p1, 2] T

    doi: 10.1038/nature10166. [p1, 2] T. M. Therneau.A package for survival analysis in R,

    work page doi:10.1038/nature10166

  21. [21]

    URL https: //journal.r-project.org/articles/RJ-2011-002/. [p11] H. Wickham.ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer-Verlag New York,

    2011