ScholarGate
Asistents

Salīdzināt metodes

Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.

Metodes (CEM / Optimālā / Ģenētiskā)×Heterogēni ārstēšanas efekti (CATE / Metamācītāji)×
NozareCēloņsakarību secināšanaCēloņsakarību secināšana
SaimeRegression modelRegression model
Izcelsmes gads20122018
AutorsIacus, King & Porro (CEM); Hansen (optimal/full matching)Wager & Athey (causal forest); Künzel et al. (meta-learners)
TipsMatching for causal inferenceCausal machine-learning framework
PirmavotsIacus, 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 ↗
Citi nosaukumicoarsened exact matching, optimal matching, genetic matching, CEMconditional average treatment effect, CATE, meta-learners, causal forest
Saistītās55
KopsavilkumsMatching 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).
ScholarGateDatu kopa
  1. v1
  2. 2 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED

Doties uz meklēšanu Lejupielādēt slaidus

ScholarGateSalīdzināt metodes: Matching Methods · Heterogeneous Treatment Effects. Izgūts 2026-06-18 no https://scholargate.app/lv/compare