ScholarGate
助手

方法对比

并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。

粗化精确匹配 (CEM)×倾向得分加权法 (PSW / IPW)×
领域因果推断因果推断
方法族Regression modelRegression model
起源年份2011-20121983 (propensity score); 2003 (efficient IPW estimator)
提出者Iacus, King, & PorroRosenbaum & Rubin (propensity score); Hirano, Imbens & Ridder (efficient weighting)
类型Matching / causal inferenceCausal inference / reweighting
开创性文献Iacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2012). Causal Inference without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching. Political Analysis, 20(1), 1-24. 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 ↗
别名CEM, coarsened matching, monotonic imbalance bounding matchingPSW, inverse probability weighting, IPW, propensity-based weighting
相关66
摘要Coarsened Exact Matching is a preprocessing method that achieves covariate balance by temporarily coarsening continuous variables into bins, exactly matching treated and control units within those bins, and then discarding all unmatched units. Introduced by Iacus, King, and Porro (2011, 2012), it bounds imbalance on each covariate independently, yielding a matched sample on which any estimator can be applied without relying on a propensity score model.Propensity score weighting is a causal-inference method that reweights observations so that the covariate distributions of treated and untreated units look exchangeable, enabling unbiased estimation of average treatment effects from observational data. Each unit receives a weight that is the inverse of its probability of receiving the treatment it actually received — a strategy formalised by Rosenbaum and Rubin (1983) and given its efficient semiparametric form by Hirano, Imbens and Ridder (2003).
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Coarsened Exact Matching · Propensity Score Weighting. 于 2026-06-19 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare