EconBase
← All papers

Sharp Sensitivity Analysis for Inverse Propensity Weighting via Quantile Balancing

Jacob Dorn, Kevin Guo

arXiv 8 Feb 2021 · Mathematics — Statistics Theory · publishedJournal of the American Statistical Association (2022) · 32 citations (OpenAlex)

arXiv:2102.04543 · PDF · DOI · OpenAlex · Extracted main text

Abstract

Inverse propensity weighting (IPW) is a popular method for estimating treatment effects from observational data. However, its correctness relies on the untestable (and frequently implausible) assumption that all confounders have been measured. This paper introduces a robust sensitivity analysis for IPW that estimates the range of treatment effects compatible with a given amount of unobserved confounding. The estimated range converges to the narrowest possible interval (under the given assumptions) that must contain the true treatment effect. Our proposal is a refinement of the influential sensitivity analysis by Zhao, Small, and Bhattacharya (2019), which we show gives bounds that are too wide even asymptotically. This analysis is based on new partial identification results for Tan (2006)'s marginal sensitivity model.

Citation extraction

60
references
127
in-text mentions
60
distinct cited
0
self-citations
10,818
main-text words

appendix boundary found by appendix_command · 39% of the source is main text. Read the extracted text to check this.

Most heavily cited references

The works this paper leans on most, across its whole bibliography — not restricted to papers in our corpus. Ranked by composite intensity, which combines how often a work is mentioned, how many sections mention it, and how much of that falls in the main text rather than the appendix.

ReferenceIntensityMentionsSectionsMain text
1Tan, Z (2006) A distributional approach for causal inference using propensity scores1.000104100%
2Zhao, Q., D. S. Small, and B. B. Bhattacharya (2019) Sensitivity analysis for inverse probability weighting estimators via the percentile bootstrap0.94112783%
3Athey, S., J. Tibshirani, and S. Wager (2019, 04) (2019) Generalized random forests0.9285380%
4Kallus, N. and A. Zhou (2020) Minimax-optimal policy learning under unobserved confounding0.92844100%
5Kallus, N. and A. Zhou (2018) Confounding-robust policy improvement0.92843100%
6Koenker, R. W. and G. Bassett (1978) Regression quantiles0.8434375%
7Lee, K., F. J. Bargagli-Stoffi, and F. Dominici (2020) Causal rule ensemble: Interpretable inference of heterogeneous treatment effects0.84333100%
8Kallus, N., X. Mao, and A. Zhou (2019) Interval estimation of individual-level causal effects under unobserved confounding0.84333100%
9Kallus, N. and A. Zhou (2020) Confounding-robust policy evaluation in infinite-horizon reinforcement learning0.84333100%
10Cinelli, C. and C. Hazlett (2020) Making sense of sensitivity: Extending omitted variables bias0.73732100%

Showing the top 10 of 60 scored citations.

Cited by, within the corpus

arXiv econ.EM papers that cite this one, ranked by how heavily they lean on it.

Citing paperIntensityMentionsSections
1A sensitivity analysis for the average derivative effect1.00074
2Sensitivity Analysis for Linear Estimators0.92854
3Doubly-Valid/Doubly-Sharp Sensitivity Analysis for Causal Inference with Unmeasured Confounding0.909126
4A General Approach to Relaxing Unconfoundedness0.84333
5Partial Identification of Causal Effects for Endogenous Continuous Treatments0.73732
6Policy Learning under Unobserved Confounding: A Robust and Efficient Approach0.675135
7Robust Design and Evaluation of Predictive Algorithms under Unobserved Confounding0.64422
8Conformalized Lee Inference: Distribution-Free Individual Treatment Effect Intervals under Monotone Sample Selection0.51121
9a framework for generalization and transportation of causal estimates under covariate shift0.40511
10Debiased Machine Learning of Aggregated Intersection Bounds and Other Causal Parameters0.40511