Causal bootstrapping

To draw scientifically meaningful conclusions and build reliable models of quantitative phenomena, cause and effect must be taken into consideration (either implicitly or explicitly). This is particularly challenging when the measurements are not from controlled experimental (interventional) settings, since cause and effect can be obscured by spurious, indirect influences. Modern predictive techniques from machine learning are capable of capturing high-dimensional, nonlinear relationships between variables while relying on few parametric or probabilistic model assumptions. However, since these techniques are associational, applied to observational data they are prone to picking up spurious influences from non-experimental (observational) data, making their predictions unreliable. Techniques from causal inference, such as probabilistic causal diagrams and do-calculus, provide powerful (nonparametric) tools for drawing causal inferences from such observational data. However, these techniques are often incompatible with modern, nonparametric machine learning algorithms since they typically require explicit probabilistic models. Here, we develop causal bootstrapping for augmenting classical nonparametric bootstrap resampling with information on the causal relationship between variables. This makes it possible to resample observational data such that, if it is possible to identify an interventional relationship from that data, new data representing that relationship can be simulated from the original observational data. In this way, we can use modern machine learning algorithms unaltered to make statistically powerful, yet causally-robust, predictions. We develop several causal bootstrapping algorithms for drawing interventional inferences from observational data, for classification and regression problems, and demonstrate, using synthetic and real-world examples, the value of this approach.

[1]  S. T. Buckland,et al.  An Introduction to the Bootstrap. , 1994 .

[2]  Davide Bacciu,et al.  Measuring the effects of confounders in medical supervised classification problems: the Confounding Index (CI) , 2019, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[3]  G. A. Young,et al.  The bootstrap: To smooth or not to smooth? , 1987 .

[4]  Uri Shalit,et al.  Removing Hidden Confounding by Experimental Grounding , 2018, NeurIPS.

[5]  Virgile Landeiro,et al.  Controlling for Unobserved Confounds in Classification Using Correlational Constraints , 2017, ICWSM.

[6]  David Lopez-Paz,et al.  Invariant Risk Minimization , 2019, ArXiv.

[7]  Robert Tibshirani,et al.  An Introduction to the Bootstrap , 1994 .

[8]  C. D. Kemp,et al.  Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis , 1987 .

[9]  Virgile Landeiro,et al.  Robust Text Classification in the Presence of Confounding Bias , 2016, AAAI.

[10]  A. Berlinet,et al.  Reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces in probability and statistics , 2004 .

[11]  Peter Spirtes,et al.  Introduction to Causal Inference , 2010, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[12]  Suchi Saria,et al.  Preventing Failures Due to Dataset Shift: Learning Predictive Models That Transport , 2018, AISTATS.

[13]  Santtu Tikka,et al.  Identifying Causal Effects with the R Package causaleffect , 2017, 1806.07161.

[14]  Lars Ailo Bongo,et al.  Reproduction study using public data of: Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for detection of diabetic retinopathy in retinal fundus photographs , 2018, PloS one.

[15]  Marcus A. Badgeley,et al.  Variable generalization performance of a deep learning model to detect pneumonia in chest radiographs: A cross-sectional study , 2018, PLoS medicine.

[16]  Larsson Omberg,et al.  A Permutation Approach to Assess Confounding in Machine Learning Applications for Digital Health , 2019, KDD.

[17]  Jan Larsen,et al.  Machine Learning for Signal Processing , 2008, Neurocomputing.

[18]  David Maxwell Chickering,et al.  Optimal Structure Identification With Greedy Search , 2002, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[19]  J. N. S. Matthews,et al.  An introduction to randomized controlled clinical trials , 2000 .

[20]  Judea Pearl,et al.  Complete Identification Methods for the Causal Hierarchy , 2008, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[21]  Gaël Varoquaux,et al.  Controlling a confound in predictive models with a test set minimizing its effect , 2018, 2018 International Workshop on Pattern Recognition in Neuroimaging (PRNI).

[22]  J. Pearl Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference , 2000 .

[23]  Jonas Peters,et al.  Causal inference by using invariant prediction: identification and confidence intervals , 2015, 1501.01332.

[24]  Mikhail Belkin,et al.  Reconciling modern machine-learning practice and the classical bias–variance trade-off , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[25]  Max A. Little,et al.  Using and understanding cross-validation strategies. Perspectives on Saeb et al. , 2017, GigaScience.

[26]  E. C. Neto,et al.  Using permutations to detect, quantify and correct for confounding in machine learning predictions , 2018 .

[27]  Elias Chaibub Neto Using permutations to quantify and correct for confounding in machine learning predictions , 2018 .

[28]  Trevor Hastie,et al.  The Elements of Statistical Learning , 2001 .