Random Graph Asymptotics for Treatment Effect Estimation under Network Interference

The network interference model for causal inference places all experimental units at the vertices of an undirected exposure graph, such that treatment assigned to one unit may affect the outcome of another unit if and only if these two units are connected by an edge. This model has recently gained popularity as means of incorporating interference effects into the Neyman--Rubin potential outcomes framework; and several authors have considered estimation of various causal targets, including the direct and indirect effects of treatment. In this paper, we consider large-sample asymptotics for treatment effect estimation under network interference in a setting where the exposure graph is a random draw from a graphon. When targeting the direct effect, we show that---in our setting---popular estimators are considerably more accurate than existing results suggest, and provide a central limit theorem in terms of moments of the graphon. Meanwhile, when targeting the indirect effect, we leverage our generative assumptions to propose a consistent estimator in a setting where no other consistent estimators are currently available. We also show how our results can be used to conduct a practical assessment of the sensitivity of randomized study inference to potential interference effects. Overall, our results highlight the promise of random graph asymptotics in understanding the practicality and limits of causal inference under network interference.

[1]  László Lovász,et al.  Limits of dense graph sequences , 2004, J. Comb. Theory B.

[2]  A. Rinaldo,et al.  Consistency of spectral clustering in stochastic block models , 2013, 1312.2050.

[3]  G. Imbens,et al.  Exact p-Values for Network Interference , 2015, 1506.02084.

[4]  Yufei Zhao,et al.  An $L^p$ theory of sparse graph convergence I: Limits, sparse random graph models, and power law distributions , 2014, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society.

[5]  Peter M. Aronow,et al.  Estimating Average Causal Effects Under Interference Between Units , 2013, 1305.6156.

[6]  Jianqing Fan,et al.  ENTRYWISE EIGENVECTOR ANALYSIS OF RANDOM MATRICES WITH LOW EXPECTED RANK. , 2017, Annals of statistics.

[7]  Guillaume W. Basse,et al.  Randomization tests of causal effects under interference , 2019, Biometrika.

[8]  D. Rubin,et al.  Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences: A General Method for Estimating Sampling Variances for Standard Estimators for Average Causal Effects , 2015 .

[9]  Fredrik Sävje,et al.  AVERAGE TREATMENT EFFECTS IN THE PRESENCE OF UNKNOWN INTERFERENCE. , 2017, Annals of statistics.

[10]  D. Aldous Representations for partially exchangeable arrays of random variables , 1981 .

[11]  G. Imbens Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Exogeneity: A Review , 2004 .

[12]  Avi Feller,et al.  Analyzing Two-Stage Experiments in the Presence of Interference , 2016, 1608.06805.

[13]  C. Stein Estimation of the Mean of a Multivariate Normal Distribution , 1981 .

[14]  Dean Eckles,et al.  Design and Analysis of Experiments in Networks: Reducing Bias from Interference , 2014, ArXiv.

[15]  M. Hudgens,et al.  Toward Causal Inference With Interference , 2008, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[16]  E. Levina,et al.  Estimating network edge probabilities by neighborhood smoothing , 2015, 1509.08588.

[17]  Martin J. Wainwright,et al.  High-Dimensional Statistics , 2019 .

[18]  Carey E. Priebe,et al.  Statistical Inference on Random Dot Product Graphs: a Survey , 2017, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[19]  Tyler J VanderWeele,et al.  On causal inference in the presence of interference , 2012, Statistical methods in medical research.

[20]  W. Kahan,et al.  The Rotation of Eigenvectors by a Perturbation. III , 1970 .

[21]  Harrison H. Zhou,et al.  Rate-optimal graphon estimation , 2014, 1410.5837.

[22]  E. Duflo,et al.  Truth-Telling by Third-Party Auditors and the Response of Polluting Firms: Experimental Evidence from India , 2013 .

[23]  Michael P. Leung Treatment and Spillover Effects under Network Interference , 2019 .

[24]  J. Aislinn Bohren,et al.  Optimal Design of Experiments in the Presence of Interference , 2017, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[25]  Nathan Ross Fundamentals of Stein's method , 2011, 1109.1880.

[26]  Charles F. Manski,et al.  Identification of Treatment Response with Social Interactions , 2013 .

[27]  Francesca Parise,et al.  Graphon Games , 2018, EC.

[28]  M. Rudelson,et al.  Hanson-Wright inequality and sub-gaussian concentration , 2013 .

[29]  Michael E. Sobel,et al.  What Do Randomized Studies of Housing Mobility Demonstrate? , 2006 .