Lucius EJ Bynum

Counterfactuals are often described as ’retrospective,’ focusing on hypothetical alternatives to a realized past. This description relates to an often implicit assumption about the structure and stability of exogenous variables in the system being modeled — an assumption that is reasonable in many settings where counterfactuals are used. In this work, we consider cases where we might reasonably make a different assumption about exogenous variables; namely, that the exogenous noise terms of each unit do exhibit some unit-specific structure and/or stability. This leads us to a different use of counterfactuals — a forward-looking rather than retrospective counterfactual. We introduce "counterfactual treatment choice," a type of treatment choice problem that motivates using forward-looking counterfactuals. We then explore how mismatches between interventional versus forward-looking counterfactual approaches to treatment choice, consistent with different assumptions about exogenous noise, can lead to counterintuitive results.

To use artificial intelligence and machine learning models wisely we must understand how they interact with the world, including how they depend causally on data inputs. In this work we develop Causal Dependence Plots (CDPs) to visualize how a model’s predicted outcome depends on changes in a given predictor along with consequent causal changes in other predictor variables. Crucially, this differs from standard methods based on independence or holding other predictors constant, such as regression coefficients or Partial Dependence Plots (PDPs). Our explanatory framework generalizes PDPs, including them as a special case, as well as a variety of other interpretive plots that show, for example, the total, direct, and indirect effects of causal mediation. We demonstrate with simulations and real data experiments how CDPs can be combined in a modular way with methods for causal learning or sensitivity analysis. Since people often think causally about input-output dependence, CDPs can be powerful tools in the xAI or interpretable machine learning toolkit and contribute to applications like scientific machine learning and algorithmic fairness.

Causal inference and the estimation of causal effects plays a central role in decision-making across many areas, including healthcare and economics. Estimating causal effects typically requires an estimator that is tailored to each problem of interest. But developing estimators can take significant effort for even a single causal inference setting. For example, algorithms for regression-based estimators, propensity score methods, and doubly robust methods were designed across several decades to handle causal estimation with observed confounders. Similarly, several estimators have been developed to exploit instrumental variables (IVs), including two-stage least-squares (TSLS), control functions, and the method-of-moments. In this work, we instead frame causal inference as a dataset-level prediction problem, offloading algorithm design to the learning process. The approach we introduce, called black box causal inference (BBCI), builds estimators in a black-box manner by learning to predict causal effects from sampled dataset-effect pairs. We demonstrate accurate estimation of average treatment effects (ATEs) and conditional average treatment effects (CATEs) with BBCI across several causal inference problems with known identification, including problems with less developed estimators.