MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387878214 · doi:10.3233/faia230655

Hydranet: A Neural Network for the Estimation of Multi-Valued Treatment Effects

2023· book-chapter· en· W4387878214 on OpenAlexaff
Borja Velasco-Regulez, Jesús Cerquides

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in artificial intelligence and applications · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónGeneralitat de Catalunya
KeywordsBenchmarkingEstimatorArtificial neural networkComputer scienceInferenceBinary numberMachine learningArtificial intelligenceEstimationCausal inferenceRange (aeronautics)Focus (optics)Data miningMathematicsEconometricsEngineeringStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neural network-based treatment effect estimation algorithms are well-known in the causal inference community. Many works propose new designs and architectures and report performance metrics over benchmarking data sets, in a Machine Learning manner. Nevertheless, most authors focus solely on binary treatment scenarios. This is a limitation, as many real-world scenarios have a multivalued treatment. In this work, we present a novel approach where we generalize a top-performing, neural network-based algorithm for binary treatment effect estimation to a multi-valued treatment setting. Our approach yields an estimator with desirable asymptotic properties, that delivers very good results in a wide range of experiments. To the best of our knowledge, this work is opening ground for the benchmarking of neural network-based algorithms for multi-valued treatment effect estimation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.773

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.180
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in artificial intelligence and applicationsSame topicAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesFrench-language works237,207