analiza aiqbench
This paper introduces GeoACE, a novel five-expert ensemble framework designed to improve the estimation of heterogeneous treatment effects in observational data by incorporating diverse geometric biases. The method demonstrates robust performance across multiple benchmarks by freezing task-level weights during validation and utilizing an outcome-free projection expert to mitigate issues like overlap and treatment imbalance. While statistical significance tests were not met for all metrics, the approach offers a practical strategy for enhancing causal inference reliability without relying on universal superiority claims for any single weighting rule.
Diverse Geometries, Frozen Weights: Robust Heterogeneous Treatment-Effect Estimation via Causal Expert Ensembles
arXiv:2609.29974v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Estimating heterogeneous treatment effects from observational data is difficult because the most appropriate inductive bias varies with overlap, treatment imbalance, prognostic structure, and sample size. We introduce the Geometry-Diverse Anchor-Correction Expert Ensemble (GeoACE), a five-expert framework that combines a common anchor-correction estimator with complementary overlap-aware and outcome-guided geometries. Its task-level ensemble weights are learned only from internal validation predictions, frozen before test evaluation, and then applied to experts refitted on the complete development sample. The fifth expert, O-Phi-ACE, constructs an outcome-free, overlap-aware statistical projection from covariates and treatment assignment and replaces the anchor input with this lower-dimensional geometry. We evaluate GeoACE against 11 comparators on eight benchmark protocols. Adding O-Phi-ACE reduced mean sqrt(PEHE) relative to the four-expert ensemble on all seven benchmarks with individual-effect truth, winning 998 of 1,225 paired tasks; the change on JOBS policy risk was negligible. The five-expert ensemble ranked first on IHDP100, IHDPA, and IHDPB and second on NEWS, differing from the NEWS leader by 0.13%. Across the seven sqrt(PEHE) benchmarks it obtained the lowest observed average rank (3.714), although the omnibus Friedman and Iman-Davenport tests were not significant (p=0.328 and p=0.330). Using the same five frozen experts, inverse-DR weighting was consistently better than winner-take-all selection, convex DR fitting, R-stacking, and causal Q-aggregation in benchmark-balanced analyses, but was statistically indistinguishable from equal weighting and DR ridge shrinkage. The evidence therefore supports geometry-diverse expert libraries and leakage-free aggregation as a robustness strategy, not universal superiority of either GeoACE or one weighting rule.
Abstract:Estimating heterogeneous treatment effects from observational data is difficult because the most appropriate inductive bias varies with overlap, treatment imbalance, prognostic structure, and sample size. We introduce the Geometry-Diverse Anchor-Correction Expert Ensemble (GeoACE), a five-expert framework that combines a common anchor-correction estimator with complementary overlap-aware and outcome-guided geometries. Its task-level ensemble weights are learned only from internal validation predictions, frozen before test evaluation, and then applied to experts refitted on the complete development sample. The fifth expert, O-Phi-ACE, constructs an outcome-free, overlap-aware statistical projection from covariates and treatment assignment and replaces the anchor input with this lower-dimensional geometry. We evaluate GeoACE against 11 comparators on eight benchmark protocols. Adding O-Phi-ACE reduced mean sqrt(PEHE) relative to the four-expert ensemble on all seven benchmarks with individual-effect truth, winning 998 of 1,225 paired tasks; the change on JOBS policy risk was negligible. The five-expert ensemble ranked first on IHDP100, IHDPA, and IHDPB and second on NEWS, differing from the NEWS leader by 0.13%. Across the seven sqrt(PEHE) benchmarks it obtained the lowest observed average rank (3.714), although the omnibus Friedman and Iman-Davenport tests were not significant (p=0.328 and p=0.330). Using the same five frozen experts, inverse-DR weighting was consistently better than winner-take-all selection, convex DR fitting, R-stacking, and causal Q-aggregation in benchmark-balanced analyses, but was statistically indistinguishable from equal weighting and DR ridge shrinkage. The evidence therefore supports geometry-diverse expert libraries and leakage-free aggregation as a robustness strategy, not universal superiority of either GeoACE or one weighting rule.
31 pages, 3 figures, 8 benchmark protocols. Supplementary material is included as an ancillary file
Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2609.29974 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2609.29974v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.29974 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
GeoACE_Supplementary_Material.pdf
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 355 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Beyond Counts: A Distributional Robustness Margin For Pathology Foundation Models
arXiv · 29 iul. 2026

PIRAMID: Progress and Plans
LessWrong · 27 iul. 2026
Orthogonal Yet Coupled: Decoupling Geometric Components for Model Merging
arXiv · 1 oct. 2026
Orthogonal Learner for Estimating Heterogeneous Long-Term Treatment Effects
arXiv · 5 iun. 2026