Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2512.03254

Assumption-Lean Differential Variance Inference for Heterogeneous Treatment Effect Detection

Abstract

The conditional average treatment effect (CATE) is frequently estimated in clinical studies to refute a homogeneous treatment effect hypothesis. Under this regime, all patients making up the population experience identical benefit from a given treatment relative to a comparator. Uncovering heterogeneous treatment effects through inference about the CATE, however, requires that covariates truly modifying the treatment effect be reliably collected at baseline. CATE-based techniques will necessarily fail to detect violations when effect modifiers are omitted from the data due to, for example, resource constraints. Severe measurement error has a similar impact. Clinical decision makers can be misled as a result. To address these limitations, we prove that a practical homogeneous treatment effect hypothesis can be gauged through inference about contrasts of the potential outcomes' variances even when effect modifiers are missing from the data. We derive causal machine learning estimators of these contrasts and study their asymptotic properties. We establish that these estimators are doubly robust and asymptotically linear under mild conditions, permitting formal hypothesis testing about the treatment effect heterogeneity. Numerical experiments demonstrate that these estimators' asymptotic guarantees are approximately achieved in finite-sample randomized and observational study data alike. These inference procedures are then used to detect heterogeneous treatment effects in the re-analysis of randomized controlled trials investigating targeted temperature management in cardiac arrest patients.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Philippe A. Boileau, Hani Zaki, Gabriele Lileikyte, Niklas Nielsen, Patrick R. Lawler, Mireille E. Schnitzer. 2026-06-22. Assumption-Lean Differential Variance Inference for Heterogeneous Treatment Effect Detection. https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.03254

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Unbiased Treatment Effect Estimation under Network Interference via Neighborhood-Excluded Cross-Fitting

Without interference, cross-fitting enables flexible covariate adjustment while preserving finite-sample unbiasedness under independent unit-level randomization. Under network interference, out-of-sample prediction alone no longer guarantees unbiasedness: assignments entering evaluation-fold Horvitz--Thompson weights may also affect outcomes in the training sample, inducing dependence between fitted predictions and those weights. We develop neighborhood-excluded cross-fitting, which constructs estimand- and design-specific training samples to restore the conditional independence needed for finite-sample unbiasedness without a correctly specified outcome model. We establish asymptotically valid design-based Wald inference for direct and indirect effects under Bernoulli randomization and for the global average treatment effect under Bernoulli cluster randomization. Neighborhood exclusion creates a trade-off in choosing the number of folds: unit-level splitting may require the number of folds to grow with average exclusion-neighborhood size, while cluster-level splitting can substantially relaxes this requirement, permitting a fixed number of folds under partial interference. For linear adjustment under Bernoulli randomization, we derive variance-optimal and confidence-interval-length-optimal procedures, establish explicit rate conditions allowing the covariate dimension to diverge, and show that the variance-optimal procedure is asymptotically no-harm. Simulations illustrate the bias from omitting neighborhood exclusion and the precision gains from adjustment. An application to a social network experiment yields confidence intervals substantially shorter than those from the unadjusted estimator.

stat.ME

Efficient estimation of weighted treatment effects under two-phase sampling

Two-phase sampling offers a practical way to collect costly confounders only in a subsample while retaining inexpensive information for a larger cohort. In observational causal studies, however, phase-2 selection can distort estimation of population causal effects if the sampling mechanism is ignored, and available phase-1 information may also be exploited to improve efficiency. Yet efficiency theory for causal estimands under such designs remains limited, particularly beyond the average treatment effect. In this paper, we derive the semiparametric efficiency bound for a class of propensity-score-weighted average treatment effects, which includes the average treatment effect, effects among treated and untreated populations, and the overlap effect, under two-phase sampling. In addition to straightforward weighting estimators based on the known sampling probabilities, we propose an enriched doubly robust estimator that attains the efficiency bound when all nuisance functions are consistently estimated. In particular, under outcome-dependent sampling, substantial efficiency gains can arise in some settings by appropriately incorporating phase-1 information. We further conduct extensive simulation studies, varying the choice of phase-1 variables and sampling schemes, to characterize when and to what extent leveraging phase-1 information leads to efficiency gains.

stat.ME

Identification and Estimation under Multiple Versions of Treatment: Mixture-of-Experts Approach

The Stable Unit Treatment Value Assumption (SUTVA) includes the condition that there are no multiple versions of treatment in causal inference. Though we could not control the implementation of treatment in observational studies, multiple versions may exist in the treatment. It has been pointed out that ignoring such multiple versions of treatment can lead to biased estimates of causal effects, but a causal inference framework that explicitly deals with the unbiased identification and estimation has not been fully developed yet. Thus, it is difficult to obtain a deeper understanding for mechanisms of the complex treatments. In this paper, we introduce the Mixture-of-Experts framework into causal inference to estimate causal contrasts between underlying versions of a treatment, even when the versions are not observed. Numerical experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.

stat.ME