seminars:stat:211118
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Next revision | Previous revision | ||
| seminars:stat:211118 [2021/11/11 18:09] – created qyu | seminars:stat:211118 [2021/11/17 20:45] (current) – qiao | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | <WRAP centeralign>## | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP 70% center> | ||
| + | ^ **DATE: | ||
| + | ^ **TIME: | ||
| + | ^ **LOCATION: | ||
| + | ^ **SPEAKER: | ||
| + | ^ **TITLE: | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | \\ | ||
| + | |||
| + | <WRAP center box 80%> | ||
| + | <WRAP centeralign> | ||
| + | This is a talk about the article by Yifan Cui and Eric Tchetgen Tchetgen. | ||
| + | There is a fast-growing literature on estimating optimal treatment regimes based on | ||
| + | randomized trials or observational studies under a key identifying condition of no | ||
| + | unmeasured confounding. Because confounding by unmeasured factors cannot generally | ||
| + | be ruled out with certainty in observational studies or randomized trials subject to | ||
| + | noncompliance, | ||
| + | learning optimal treatment regimes under endogeneity. Specifically, | ||
| + | identification of both value function for a given regime D and optimal regimes with | ||
| + | the aid of a binary IV, when no unmeasured confounding fails to hold. | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
