EconBase
← All papers

Finding Subgroups with Significant Treatment Effects

Jann Spiess, Vasilis Syrgkanis, Victor Yaneng Wang

arXiv 12 Mar 2021 · Econometrics

arXiv:2103.07066 · PDF · DOI · OpenAlex · Extracted main text

Abstract

Researchers often run resource-intensive randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to estimate the causal effects of interventions on outcomes of interest. Yet these outcomes are often noisy, and estimated overall effects can be small or imprecise. Nevertheless, we may still be able to produce reliable evidence of the efficacy of an intervention by finding subgroups with significant effects. In this paper, we propose a machine-learning method that is specifically optimized for finding such subgroups in noisy data. Unlike available methods for personalized treatment assignment, our tool is fundamentally designed to take significance testing into account: it produces a subgroup that is chosen to maximize the probability of obtaining a statistically significant positive treatment effect. We provide a computationally efficient implementation using decision trees and demonstrate its gain over selecting subgroups based on positive (estimated) treatment effects. Compared to standard tree-based regression and classification tools, this approach tends to yield higher power in detecting subgroups affected by the treatment.

Citation extraction

52
references
81
in-text mentions
52
distinct cited
3
self-citations
15,668
main-text words

appendix boundary found by appendix_command · 71% 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
1Foster, Dylan J and Vasilis Syrgkanis (2019) Orthogonal statistical learning0.92844100%
2Armstrong, Timothy B and Shu Shen (2015) Inference on optimal treatment assignments0.73732100%
3Athey, Susan and Guido Imbens (2016) Recursive partitioning for heterogeneous causal effects0.73732100%
4Nie, Xinkun and Stefan Wager (2017) Quasi-oracle estimation of heterogeneous treatment effects0.73732100%
5Syrgkanis, Vasilis and Manolis Zampetakis (2020) Estimation and inference with trees and forests in high dimensions self0.6938250%
6Chernozhukov, Victor, Whitney Newey, and James Robins (2018) Double/de-biased machine learning using regularized riesz representers0.64422100%
7Dudḱ, Miroslav, John Langford, and Lihong Li (2011) Doubly robust policy evaluation and learning0.64422100%
8Oprescu, Miruna, Vasilis Syrgkanis, and Zhiwei Steven Wu (2019) Orthogonal random forest for causal inference self0.64422100%
9Swaminathan, Adith and Thorsten Joachims (2015) Counterfactual risk minimization: Learning from logged bandit feedback0.64422100%
10Zhou, Zhengyuan, Susan Athey, and Stefan Wager (2018) Offline multi-action policy learning: Generalization and optimization0.64422100%

Showing the top 10 of 52 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
1Generalizability with ignorance in mind: learning what we do (not) know for archetypes discovery0.51121