How Do Applied Researchers Use the Causal Forest? A Methodological Review

IF 1.8 3区 数学 Q1 STATISTICS & PROBABILITY
Patrick Rehill
{"title":"How Do Applied Researchers Use the Causal Forest? A Methodological Review","authors":"Patrick Rehill","doi":"10.1111/insr.12610","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This methodological review examines the use of the causal forest method by applied researchers across 133 peer-reviewed papers. It shows that the emerging best practice relies heavily on the approach and tools created by the original authors of the causal forest such as their grf package and the approaches given by them in examples. Generally, researchers use the causal forest on a relatively low-dimensional dataset relying on observed controls or in some cases experiments to identify effects. There are several common ways to then communicate results–by mapping out the univariate distribution of individual-level treatment effect estimates, displaying variable importance results for the forest and graphing the distribution of treatment effects across covariates that are important either for theoretical reasons or because they have high variable importance. Some deviations from this common practice are interesting and deserve further development and use. Others are unnecessary or even harmful. The paper concludes by reflecting on the emerging best practice for causal forest use and paths for future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":14479,"journal":{"name":"International Statistical Review","volume":"93 2","pages":"288-316"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/insr.12610","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Statistical Review","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/insr.12610","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"STATISTICS & PROBABILITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This methodological review examines the use of the causal forest method by applied researchers across 133 peer-reviewed papers. It shows that the emerging best practice relies heavily on the approach and tools created by the original authors of the causal forest such as their grf package and the approaches given by them in examples. Generally, researchers use the causal forest on a relatively low-dimensional dataset relying on observed controls or in some cases experiments to identify effects. There are several common ways to then communicate results–by mapping out the univariate distribution of individual-level treatment effect estimates, displaying variable importance results for the forest and graphing the distribution of treatment effects across covariates that are important either for theoretical reasons or because they have high variable importance. Some deviations from this common practice are interesting and deserve further development and use. Others are unnecessary or even harmful. The paper concludes by reflecting on the emerging best practice for causal forest use and paths for future research.

Abstract Image

应用研究人员如何使用因果森林?方法回顾
本方法学综述检查了133篇同行评议论文中应用研究人员对因果森林方法的使用。它表明,新兴的最佳实践在很大程度上依赖于因果森林的原作者创建的方法和工具,例如他们的grf包和他们在示例中给出的方法。一般来说,研究人员在相对低维的数据集上使用因果森林,依赖于观察到的控制,或者在某些情况下通过实验来识别影响。然后有几种常见的方法来传达结果——通过绘制个人水平处理效果估计的单变量分布,显示森林的变量重要性结果,以及绘制处理效果跨协变量分布的图表,这些协变量要么因为理论原因重要,要么因为它们具有高变量重要性。这种常见做法的一些偏差很有趣,值得进一步开发和使用。还有一些是不必要的,甚至是有害的。论文最后反思了新兴的因果森林利用的最佳实践和未来研究的路径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Statistical Review
International Statistical Review 数学-统计学与概率论
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
5.00%
发文量
52
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Statistical Review is the flagship journal of the International Statistical Institute (ISI) and of its family of Associations. It publishes papers of broad and general interest in statistics and probability. The term Review is to be interpreted broadly. The types of papers that are suitable for publication include (but are not limited to) the following: reviews/surveys of significant developments in theory, methodology, statistical computing and graphics, statistical education, and application areas; tutorials on important topics; expository papers on emerging areas of research or application; papers describing new developments and/or challenges in relevant areas; papers addressing foundational issues; papers on the history of statistics and probability; white papers on topics of importance to the profession or society; and historical assessment of seminal papers in the field and their impact.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信