Inference on Breakdown Frontiers
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Given a set of baseline assumptions, a breakdown frontier is the boundary between the set of assumptions which lead to a specific conclusion and those which do not. In a potential outcomes model with a binary treatment, we consider two conclusions: First, that ATE is at least a specific value (e.g., nonnegative) and second that the proportion of units who benefit from treatment is at least a specific value (e.g., at least 50%). For these conclusions, we derive the breakdown frontier for two kinds of assumptions: one which indexes relaxations of the baseline random assignment of treatment assumption, and one which indexes relaxations of the baseline rank invariance assumption. These classes of assumptions nest both the point identifying assumptions of random assignment and rank invariance and the opposite end of no constraints on treatment selection or the dependence structure between potential outcomes. This frontier provides a quantitative measure of robustness of conclusions to relaxations of the baseline point identifying assumptions. We derive √N-consistent sample analog estimators for these frontiers. We then provide two asymptotically valid bootstrap procedures for constructing lower uniform confidence bands for the breakdown frontier. As a measure of robustness, estimated breakdown frontiers and their corresponding confidence bands can be presented alongside traditional point estimates and confidence intervals obtained under point identifying assumptions. We illustrate this approach in an empirical application to the effect of child soldiering on wages. We find that sufficiently weak conclusions are robust to simultaneous failures of rank invariance and random assignment, while some stronger conclusions are fairly robust to failures of rank invariance but not necessarily to relaxations of random assignment.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 12 May 2017.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 0; 2026: 2.
4 papers.
- 2023Causal Fairness under Unobserved Confounding: A Neural Sensitivity Frameworkcited by 10
- 2022Robust Design and Evaluation of Predictive Algorithms under Unobserved Confoundingcited by 7
- 2026Minimum Specification Perturbation: Robustness as Distance-to-Falsification in Causal Inferencecited by 0
- 2026One Score, Two Decisions: Selective Prediction on the Rare-Disease Tailcited by 0
- 2026One Score, Two Decisions: Selective Prediction on the Rare-Disease Tail5 Aug 2026
- 2026Minimum Specification Perturbation: Robustness as Distance-to-Falsification in Causal Inference2 May 2026
- 2023Causal Fairness under Unobserved Confounding: A Neural Sensitivity Framework30 Nov 2023
- 2022Robust Design and Evaluation of Predictive Algorithms under Unobserved Confounding19 Dec 2022