Vertaile menetelmiä

	Koneoppimisella täydennetty differenssi-differenssi-menetelmä (ML-DiD)	Propensity Score Matching
Tieteenala	Kausaalipäättely	Tutkimuksen tilastomenetelmät
Menetelmäperhe	Regression model	Process / pipeline
Syntyvuosi	2018-2020	1983
Kehittäjä	Chernozhukov et al. (double/debiased ML framework); Sant'Anna & Zhao (2020) for DR-DiD	Paul Rosenbaum and Donald Rubin
Tyyppi	Causal inference / semiparametric	Method
Alkuperäislähde	Chernozhukov, 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.	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.
Rinnakkaisnimet	ML-DiD, double/debiased ML DiD, DML difference-in-differences, augmented DiD	PSM, propensity score weighting, covariate balance
Liittyvät	6	3
Tiivistelmä	Machine learning-augmented DiD combines the classic difference-in-differences identification strategy with flexible ML estimators for nuisance functions — the propensity score and the outcome regression — to obtain valid causal estimates even when treatment selection and outcome dynamics are complex, high-dimensional, or nonlinear. The approach, rooted in double/debiased machine learning (Chernozhukov et al., 2018) and doubly-robust DiD (Sant'Anna & Zhao, 2020), guards against misspecification bias while preserving the core DiD logic of before-after, treated-versus-control comparisons.	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.