Treatment Effects on Ordinal Outcomes: Causal Estimands and Sharp Bounds

Assessing the causal effects of interventions on ordinal outcomes is an important objective of many educational and behavioral studies. Under the potential outcomes framework, we can define causal effects as comparisons between the potential outcomes under treatment and control. However, unfortunately, the average causal effect, often the parameter of interest, is difficult to interpret for ordinal outcomes. To address this challenge, we propose to use two causal parameters, which are defined as the probabilities that the treatment is beneficial and strictly beneficial for the experimental units. However, although well-defined for any outcomes and of particular interest for ordinal outcomes, the two aforementioned parameters depend on the association between the potential outcomes, and are therefore not identifiable from the observed data without additional assumptions. Echoing recent advances in the econometrics and biostatistics literature, we present the sharp bounds of the aforementioned causal parameters for ordinal outcomes, under fixed marginal distributions of the potential outcomes. Because the causal estimands and their corresponding sharp bounds are based on the potential outcomes themselves, the proposed framework can be flexibly incorporated into any chosen models of the potential outcomes, and are directly applicable to randomized experiments, unconfounded observational studies, and randomized experiments with noncompliance. We illustrate our methodology via numerical examples and three real-life applications related to educational and behavioral research.Comment: Accepted by the Journal of Education and Behavioral Statistic

The matching polytope does not admit fully-polynomial size relaxation schemes

The groundbreaking work of Rothvo{\ss} [arxiv:1311.2369] established that every linear program expressing the matching polytope has an exponential number of inequalities (formally, the matching polytope has exponential extension complexity). We generalize this result by deriving strong bounds on the polyhedral inapproximability of the matching polytope: for fixed $0 < \varepsilon < 1$, every polyhedral $(1 + \varepsilon / n)$-approximation requires an exponential number of inequalities, where $n$ is the number of vertices. This is sharp given the well-known $\rho$-approximation of size $O(\binom{n}{\rho/(\rho-1)})$ provided by the odd-sets of size up to $\rho/(\rho-1)$. Thus matching is the first problem in $P$, whose natural linear encoding does not admit a fully polynomial-size relaxation scheme (the polyhedral equivalent of an FPTAS), which provides a sharp separation from the polynomial-size relaxation scheme obtained e.g., via constant-sized odd-sets mentioned above. Our approach reuses ideas from Rothvo{\ss} [arxiv:1311.2369], however the main lower bounding technique is different. While the original proof is based on the hyperplane separation bound (also called the rectangle corruption bound), we employ the information-theoretic notion of common information as introduced in Braun and Pokutta [http://eccc.hpi-web.de/report/2013/056/], which allows to analyze perturbations of slack matrices. It turns out that the high extension complexity for the matching polytope stem from the same source of hardness as for the correlation polytope: a direct sum structure.Comment: 21 pages, 3 figure

Bounds on Parameters in Dynamic Discrete Choice Models

Identification of dynamic nonlinear panel data models is an important and delicate problem in econometrics. In this paper we provide insights that shed light on the identification of parameters of some commonly used models. Using this insight, we are able to show through simple calculations that point identification often fails in these models. On the other hand, these calculations also suggest that the model restricts the parameter to lie in a region that is very small in many cases, and the failure of point identification may therefore be of little practical importance in those cases. Although the emphasis is on identification, our techniques are constructive in that they can easily form the basis for consistent estimates of the identified sets.

Sensitivity Analysis for Multiple Comparisons in Matched Observational Studies through Quadratically Constrained Linear Programming

A sensitivity analysis in an observational study assesses the robustness of significant findings to unmeasured confounding. While sensitivity analyses in matched observational studies have been well addressed when there is a single outcome variable, accounting for multiple comparisons through the existing methods yields overly conservative results when there are multiple outcome variables of interest. This stems from the fact that unmeasured confounding cannot affect the probability of assignment to treatment differently depending on the outcome being analyzed. Existing methods allow this to occur by combining the results of individual sensitivity analyses to assess whether at least one hypothesis is significant, which in turn results in an overly pessimistic assessment of a study's sensitivity to unobserved biases. By solving a quadratically constrained linear program, we are able to perform a sensitivity analysis while enforcing that unmeasured confounding must have the same impact on the treatment assignment probabilities across outcomes for each individual in the study. We show that this allows for uniform improvements in the power of a sensitivity analysis not only for testing the overall null of no effect, but also for null hypotheses on \textit{specific} outcome variables while strongly controlling the familywise error rate. We illustrate our method through an observational study on the effect of smoking on naphthalene exposure