Estimation of network treatment effects with non-ignorable missing confounders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In causal inference, interference takes place when the intervention on one unit affects the outcome of other units. Most of the previous methods for estimating network causal effects assume that the covariate information is complete, which may lead to biased estimates when missingness exists. In this study, we consider the partial and direct interference setting. Specifically, the whole population can be divided into different clusters. Within each cluster, the outcome of each unit is dependent on the intervention received by other units, but not dependent on the confounders or outcomes of other units within the same cluster or of those in different clusters. We also assume that the confounders are subject to non-ignorable missingness, and a confounder is considered as missing if any component of it is missing. We propose three consistent estimators for the direct, indirect, total, and overall effect of the intervention on the outcome, and derive the asymptotic results accordingly. A comprehensive study is carried out as well to investigate the finite sample properties of the proposed estimators. We illustrate the proposed methods by analyzing the dataset collected from an acid rain program, which was launched to reduce air pollution in the United States by encouraging the scrubber’s installation on power plants, where the records of some operating characteristics of the power generating facilities are subject to missingness.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.080 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".