ScholarGate
المساعد

قارن الطرق

راجع الطرق التي اخترتها جنبًا إلى جنب؛ الصفوف المختلفة مميَّزة.

تقييم الأثر السببي المعزز بالتعلم الآلي×مطابقة درجات الميل×
المجالالاستدلال السببيإحصاء البحث
العائلةRegression modelProcess / pipeline
سنة النشأة2016-20191983
صاحب الطريقةChernozhukov et al.; Athey & ImbensPaul Rosenbaum and Donald Rubin
النوعCausal inference / ML-augmented evaluationMethod
المصدر التأسيسيChernozhukov, V., Chetverikov, D., Demirer, M., Duflo, E., Hansen, C., Newey, W., & Robins, J. (2018). Double/debiased machine learning for treatment and structural parameters. The Econometrics Journal, 21(1), C1-C68. DOI ↗Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55. DOI ↗
الأسماء البديلةML-augmented counterfactual evaluation, ML-CIE, causal ML impact evaluation, double ML counterfactual evaluationPSM, propensity score weighting, covariate balance
ذات صلة53
الملخصMachine learning-augmented counterfactual impact evaluation combines the credibility of potential-outcomes causal inference with the flexibility of modern ML algorithms. Rather than imposing parametric functional forms for confounders, ML learners — such as lasso, random forests, or neural nets — estimate nuisance functions (propensity scores, outcome regressions) that are then used to construct approximately unbiased estimates of causal effects. The canonical instantiation is Double/Debiased Machine Learning (DML), formalized by Chernozhukov et al. (2018).Propensity score matching (PSM) is a method for reducing confounding bias in observational studies by balancing baseline characteristics between treatment groups, simulating randomization. Developed by Rosenbaum and Rubin (1983), it estimates the probability of receiving treatment given observed covariates, then matches or weights treated and control individuals with similar treatment probabilities. Widely used in medicine, epidemiology, and policy evaluation when randomized trials are infeasible or unethical, enabling estimation of treatment effects while controlling for selection bias.
ScholarGateمجموعة البيانات
  1. v1
  2. 2 المصادر
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 المصادر
  3. PUBLISHED

انتقل إلى البحث تنزيل الشرائح

ScholarGateقارن الطرق: Machine Learning-Augmented Counterfactual Impact Evaluation · Propensity Score Matching. استُرجع بتاريخ 2026-06-18 من https://scholargate.app/ar/compare