The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Program evaluation and causal inference with high-dimensional data
Abstract
In this paper, we provide efficient estimators and honest confidence bands for a variety of treatment effects including local average (LATE) and local quantile treatment effects (LQTE) in data-rich environments. We can handle very many control variables, endogenous receipt of treatment, heterogeneous treatment effects, and function-valued outcomes. Our framework covers the special case of exogenous receipt of treatment, either conditional on controls or unconditionally as in randomized control trials. In the latter case, our approach produces efficient estimators and honest bands for (functional) average treatment effects (ATE) and quantile treatment effects (QTE). To make informative inference possible, we assume that key reduced form predictive relationships are approximately sparse. This assumption allows the use of regularization and selection methods to estimate those relations, and we provide methods for post-regularization and post-selection inference that are uniformly valid (honest) across a wide-range of models. We show that a key ingredient enabling honest inference is the use of orthogonal or doubly robust moment conditions in estimating certain reduced form functional parameters. We illustrate the use of the proposed methods with an application to estimating the effect of 401(k) eligibility and participation on accumulated assets. The results on program evaluation are obtained as a consequence of more general results on honest inference in a general moment condition framework, which arises from structural equation models in econometrics. Here too the crucial ingredient is the use of orthogonal moment conditions, which can be constructed from the initial moment conditions. We provide results on honest inference for (function-valued) parameters within this general framework where any high-quality, modern machine learning methods can be used to learn the nonparametric/high-dimensional components of the model. These include a number of supporting auxilliary results that are of major independent interest: namely, we (1) prove uniform validity of a multiplier bootstrap, (2) offer a uniformly valid functional delta method, and (3) provide results for sparsity-based estimation of regression functions for function-valued outcomes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The adaptive lasso and its oracle properties
Zou, H. (2006) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/016214506000000735 · Cited by 7,470
Vaart, A. W. V. D. (1998) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511802256 · Cited by 4,159
The Asymptotic Variance of Semiparametric Estimators
Newey, W. K. (1994) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/2951752 · Cited by 717
Inference on Counterfactual Distributions
(2013) · Econometrica · doi:10.3982/ecta10582 · Cited by 601
Self-citationEstimation of semiparametric models when the criterion function is not smooth
Chen, X., Linton, O., & Van Keilegom, I. (2003) · Econometrica · doi:10.1111/1468-0262.00461 · Cited by 411
Cited by
Difference-in-Differences with multiple time periods
Callaway, B., & Sant’Anna, P. H. C. (2021) · Journal of Econometrics · doi:10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.12.001 · Cited by 9,126
Covariate Balancing Propensity Score
Imai, K., & Ratkovic, M. (2014) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/rssb.12027 · Cited by 1,315
Doubly robust difference-in-differences estimators
Sant’Anna, P. H. C., & Zhao, J. (2020) · Journal of Econometrics · doi:10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.06.003 · Cited by 1,047
Double/debiased machine learning for treatment and structural parameters
Newey, W. K., Hansen, C., Duflo, E., Robins, J., Chernozhukov, V., Demirer, M., & Chetverikov, D. (2017) · doi:10.1920/wp.cem.2017.2817 · Cited by 486
Self-citationYamane, T., & Kaneko, S. (2021) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.125932 · Cited by 199
Metadata
- Authors
- Belloni, A., Chernozhukov, V., Fernandez-Val, I., & Hansen, C.
- Publisher
- The Institute for Fiscal Studies
- Published
- 2016-03-19
- OpenAlex
- W2324304918
- Cited by
- 170
- References
- 5
- Type
- report
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.