Matching Items (2)
- Genre: Doctoral Dissertation
- Creators: Arizona State University
- Creators: Enders, Craig K.
- Creators: Enders, Stephen G
This dissertation covers several topics in machine learning and causal inference. First, the question of “feature selection,” a common byproduct of regularized machine learning methods, is investigated theoretically in the context of treatment effect estimation. This involves a detailed review and extension of frameworks for estimating causal effects and in-depth theoretical study. Next, various computational approaches to estimating causal effects with machine learning methods are compared with these theoretical desiderata in mind. Several improvements to current methods for causal machine learning are identified and compelling angles for further study are pinpointed. Finally, a common method used for “explaining” predictions of machine learning algorithms, SHAP, is evaluated critically through a statistical lens.
Random Forests is a statistical learning method which has been proposed for propensity score estimation models that involve complex interactions, nonlinear relationships, or both of the covariates. In this dissertation I conducted a simulation study to examine the effects of three Random Forests model specifications in propensity score analysis. The results suggested that, depending on the nature of data, optimal specification of (1) decision rules to select the covariate and its split value in a Classification Tree, (2) the number of covariates randomly sampled for selection, and (3) methods of estimating Random Forests propensity scores could potentially produce an unbiased average treatment effect estimate after propensity scores weighting by the odds adjustment. Compared to the logistic regression estimation model using the true propensity score model, Random Forests had an additional advantage in producing unbiased estimated standard error and correct statistical inference of the average treatment effect. The relationship between the balance on the covariates' means and the bias of average treatment effect estimate was examined both within and between conditions of the simulation. Within conditions, across repeated samples there was no noticeable correlation between the covariates' mean differences and the magnitude of bias of average treatment effect estimate for the covariates that were imbalanced before adjustment. Between conditions, small mean differences of covariates after propensity score adjustment were not sensitive enough to identify the optimal Random Forests model specification for propensity score analysis.