ScholarGate
Assistente

Comparar métodos

Examine os métodos selecionados lado a lado; as linhas que diferem ficam destacadas.

Avaliação de Impacto Contrafactual Aumentada por Aprendizado de Máquina×Propensity Score Matching×
ÁreaInferência causalEstatística para pesquisa
FamíliaRegression modelProcess / pipeline
Ano de origem2016-20191983
Autor originalChernozhukov et al.; Athey & ImbensPaul Rosenbaum and Donald Rubin
TipoCausal inference / ML-augmented evaluationMethod
Fonte seminalChernozhukov, 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 ↗
Outros nomesML-augmented counterfactual evaluation, ML-CIE, causal ML impact evaluation, double ML counterfactual evaluationPSM, propensity score weighting, covariate balance
Relacionados53
ResumoMachine 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.
ScholarGateConjunto de dados
  1. v1
  2. 2 Fontes
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 Fontes
  3. PUBLISHED

Ir para a pesquisa Baixar slides

ScholarGateComparar métodos: Machine Learning-Augmented Counterfactual Impact Evaluation · Propensity Score Matching. Recuperado em 2026-06-18 de https://scholargate.app/pt/compare