On Evolution-Based Models for Experimentation Under Interference

Sadegh Shirani, Mohsen Bayati

arXiv 26 Nov 2025 · Statistics — Machine Learning

arXiv:2511.21675 · PDF · DOI · OpenAlex · Extracted main text

Abstract

Causal effect estimation in networked systems is central to data-driven decision making. In such settings, interventions on one unit can spill over to others, and in complex physical or social systems, the interaction pathways driving these interference structures remain largely unobserved. We argue that for identifying population-level causal effects, it is not necessary to recover the exact network structure; instead, it suffices to characterize how those interactions contribute to the evolution of outcomes. Building on this principle, we study an evolution-based approach that investigates how outcomes change across observation rounds in response to interventions, hence compensating for missing network information. Using an exposure-mapping perspective, we give an axiomatic characterization of when the empirical distribution of outcomes follows a low-dimensional recursive equation, and identify minimal structural conditions under which such evolution mappings exist. We frame this as a distributional counterpart to difference-in-differences. Rather than assuming parallel paths for individual units, it exploits parallel evolution patterns across treatment scenarios to estimate counterfactual trajectories. A key insight is that treatment randomization plays a role beyond eliminating latent confounding; it induces an implicit sampling from hidden interference channels, enabling consistent learning about heterogeneous spillover effects. We highlight causal message passing as an instantiation of this method in dense networks while extending to more general interference structures, including influencer networks where a small set of units drives most spillovers. Finally, we discuss the limits of this approach, showing that strong temporal trends or endogenous interference can undermine identification.

Citation extraction

appendix boundary found by none_found · 100% 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 56 scored citations.

Cited by, within the corpus

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