Balancing Flexibility and Interpretability: A Conditional Linear Model Estimation via Random Forest

Ricardo Masini, Marcelo Medeiros

arXiv 19 Feb 2025 · Statistics — Methodology

arXiv:2502.13438 · PDF · DOI · OpenAlex · Extracted main text

Abstract

Traditional parametric econometric models often rely on rigid functional forms, while nonparametric techniques, despite their flexibility, frequently lack interpretability. This paper proposes a parsimonious alternative by modeling the outcome $Y$ as a linear function of a vector of variables of interest $\boldsymbol{X}$, conditional on additional covariates $\boldsymbol{Z}$. Specifically, the conditional expectation is expressed as $\mathbb{E}[Y|\boldsymbol{X},\boldsymbol{Z}]=\boldsymbol{X}^{T}\boldsymbol{\beta}(\boldsymbol{Z})$, where $\boldsymbol{\beta}(\cdot)$ is an unknown Lipschitz-continuous function. We introduce an adaptation of the Random Forest (RF) algorithm to estimate this model, balancing the flexibility of machine learning methods with the interpretability of traditional linear models. This approach addresses a key challenge in applied econometrics by accommodating heterogeneity in the relationship between covariates and outcomes. Furthermore, the heterogeneous partial effects of $\boldsymbol{X}$ on $Y$ are represented by $\boldsymbol{\beta}(\cdot)$ and can be directly estimated using our proposed method. Our framework effectively unifies established parametric and nonparametric models, including varying-coefficient, switching regression, and additive models. We provide theoretical guarantees, such as pointwise and $L^p$-norm rates of convergence for the estimator, and establish a pointwise central limit theorem through subsampling, aiding inference on the function $\boldsymbol\beta(\cdot)$. We present Monte Carlo simulation results to assess the finite-sample performance of the method.

Citation extraction

appendix boundary found by appendix_command · 47% 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.

Showing the top 10 of 34 scored citations.

Cited by, within the corpus

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