EconBase
← All papers

Deep Learning With DAGs

Sourabh Balgi, Adel Daoud, Jose M. Peña, Geoffrey T. Wodtke, Jesse Zhou

arXiv 12 Jan 2024 · Statistics — Machine Learning · publishedSociological Methods & Research (2025) · 1 citations (OpenAlex)

arXiv:2401.06864 · PDF · DOI · OpenAlex · Extracted main text

Abstract

Social science theories often postulate causal relationships among a set of variables or events. Although directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) are increasingly used to represent these theories, their full potential has not yet been realized in practice. As non-parametric causal models, DAGs require no assumptions about the functional form of the hypothesized relationships. Nevertheless, to simplify the task of empirical evaluation, researchers tend to invoke such assumptions anyway, even though they are typically arbitrary and do not reflect any theoretical content or prior knowledge. Moreover, functional form assumptions can engender bias, whenever they fail to accurately capture the complexity of the causal system under investigation. In this article, we introduce causal-graphical normalizing flows (cGNFs), a novel approach to causal inference that leverages deep neural networks to empirically evaluate theories represented as DAGs. Unlike conventional approaches, cGNFs model the full joint distribution of the data according to a DAG supplied by the analyst, without relying on stringent assumptions about functional form. In this way, the method allows for flexible, semi-parametric estimation of any causal estimand that can be identified from the DAG, including total effects, conditional effects, direct and indirect effects, and path-specific effects. We illustrate the method with a reanalysis of Blau and Duncan's (1967) model of status attainment and Zhou's (2019) model of conditional versus controlled mobility. To facilitate adoption, we provide open-source software together with a series of online tutorials for implementing cGNFs. The article concludes with a discussion of current limitations and directions for future development.

Citation extraction

83
references
142
in-text mentions
83
distinct cited
6
self-citations
20,334
main-text words

appendix boundary found by appendix_command · 86% 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
1Blau, P. M. and Duncan, O. D (1967) The American Occupational Structure1.000164100%
2Zhou, X (2019) Equalization or selection? reassessing the “meritocratic power” of a college degree in intergenerational income mobility1.000124100%
3Wehenkel, A. and Louppe, G (2019) Unconstrained monotonic neural networks0.87452100%
4Elwert, F (2013) Graphical causal models0.84333100%
5Pearl, J (2009) Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference0.81142100%
6Balgi, S., Peña, J. M., and Daoud, A (2022) Personalized public policy analysis using causal-graphical normalizing flows self0.7373367%
7Huang, C.-W., Krueger, D., Lacoste, A., and Courville, A. C (2018) Neural autoregressive flows0.73732100%
8Koch, B., Sainburg, T., Geraldo, P., Jiang, S., Sun, Y., and Foster,… (2021) Deep learning of potential outcomes0.73732100%
9VanderWeele, T. J (2015) Explanation in Causal Inference: Methods for Mediation and Interaction0.73732100%
10Wehenkel, A. and Louppe, G (2021) Graphical normalizing flows0.73732100%

Showing the top 10 of 83 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
1Causal Mediation Analysis with Multiple Mediators: A Simulation Approach1.000123
2Detecting and Mitigating Treatment Leakage in Text-Based Causal Inference: Distillation and Sensitivity Analysis0.40511