Abstract:Causal inference, especially in observational studies, relies on untestable assumptions about the true data-generating process. Sensitivity analysis helps us determine how robust our conclusions are when we alter these underlying assumptions. Existing frameworks for sensitivity analysis are concerned with worst-case changes in assumptions. In this work, we argue that using such pessimistic criteria can often become uninformative or lead to conclusions contradicting our prior knowledge about the world. To demonstrate this claim, we generalize the recent s-value framework (Gupta & Rothenhäusler, 2023) to estimate the sensitivity of three different common assumptions in causal inference. Empirically, we find that, indeed, worst-case conclusions about sensitivity can rely on unrealistic changes in the data-generating process. To overcome this, we extend the s-value framework with a new sensitivity analysis criterion: Bayesian Sensitivity Value (BSV), which computes the expected sensitivity of an estimate to assumption violations under priors constructed from real-world evidence. We use Monte Carlo approximations to estimate this quantity and illustrate its applicability in an observational study on the effect of diabetes treatments on weight loss.
| Comments: | TMLR 2026 |
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG); Methodology (stat.ME) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2605.07993 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2605.07993v1 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.07993 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) |
From: Nikita Dhawan [view email]
[v1]
Fri, 8 May 2026 16:50:05 UTC (2,697 KB)
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理，仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。