ScholarGate
المساعد

قارن الطرق

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

طرق المطابقة (CEM / المثلى / الجينية)×تأثيرات المعالجة غير المتجانسة (CATE / المتعلمون الفوقيون)×
المجالالاستدلال السببيالاستدلال السببي
العائلةRegression modelRegression model
سنة النشأة20122018
صاحب الطريقةIacus, King & Porro (CEM); Hansen (optimal/full matching)Wager & Athey (causal forest); Künzel et al. (meta-learners)
النوعMatching for causal inferenceCausal machine-learning framework
المصدر التأسيسيIacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2012). Causal Inference without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching. Political Analysis, 20(1), 1-24. DOI ↗Wager, S. & Athey, S. (2018). Estimation and Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Random Forests. Journal of the American Statistical Association. DOI ↗
الأسماء البديلةcoarsened exact matching, optimal matching, genetic matching, CEMconditional average treatment effect, CATE, meta-learners, causal forest
ذات صلة55
الملخصMatching Methods are a family of causal-inference techniques beyond propensity-score matching that pair treated and control units with similar covariates so that a treatment effect can be read off the balanced sample. The family includes Coarsened Exact Matching (Iacus, King & Porro, 2012), optimal matching, and genetic matching.Heterogeneous Treatment Effects is a machine-learning framework that estimates how a treatment effect varies across individuals — the conditional average treatment effect (CATE). It bundles meta-learner strategies such as the T-Learner, S-Learner, X-Learner and R-Learner alongside the causal forest of Wager and Athey (2018) and Künzel et al. (2019).
ScholarGateمجموعة البيانات
  1. v1
  2. 2 المصادر
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 المصادر
  3. PUBLISHED

انتقل إلى البحث تنزيل الشرائح

ScholarGateقارن الطرق: Matching Methods · Heterogeneous Treatment Effects. استُرجع بتاريخ 2026-06-17 من https://scholargate.app/ar/compare