mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Sense and Sensitivity Analysis: Simple Post-Hoc Analysis of Bias Due to Unobserved Confounding

arXiv 2003.01747 ↗First posted 3 Mar 2020stat.ME cs.LG stat.MLcited by 25

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

It is a truth universally acknowledged that an observed association without known mechanism must be in want of a causal estimate. However, causal estimation from observational data often relies on the (untestable) assumption of `no unobserved confounding'. Violations of this assumption can induce bias in effect estimates. In principle, such bias could invalidate or reverse the conclusions of a study. However, in some cases, we might hope that the influence of unobserved confounders is weak relative to a `large' estimated effect, so the qualitative conclusions are robust to bias from unobserved confounding. The purpose of this paper is to develop Austen plots, a sensitivity analysis tool to aid such judgments by making it easier to reason about potential bias induced by unobserved confounding. We formalize confounding strength in terms of how strongly the confounder influences treatment assignment and outcome. For a target level of bias, an Austen plot shows the minimum values of treatment and outcome influence required to induce that level of bias. Domain experts can then make subjective judgments about whether such strong confounders are plausible. To aid this judgment, the Austen plot additionally displays the estimated influence strength of (groups of) the observed covariates. Austen plots generalize the classic sensitivity analysis approach of Imbens [Imb03]. Critically, Austen plots allow any approach for modeling the observed data and producing the initial estimate. We illustrate the tool by assessing biases for several real causal inference problems, using a variety of machine learning approaches for the initial data analysis. Code is available at https://github.com/anishazaveri/austenplots

Key facts. Cited by 25 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 3 Mar 2020.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 5; 2022: 6; 2023: 7; 2024: 2; 2025: 3; 2026: 2.

25 papers.

Sort:

  1. 2021Quantifying Ignorance in Individual-Level Causal-Effect Estimates under Hidden Confoundingcited by 50
  2. 2021Long Story Short: Omitted Variable Bias in Causal Machine Learningcited by 23
  3. 2021DoWhy: Addressing Challenges in Expressing and Validating Causal Assumptionscited by 20
  4. 2021Prescriptive Process Monitoring for Cost-Aware Cycle Time Reductioncited by 17
  5. 2023A Diachronic Analysis of Paradigm Shifts in NLP Research: When, How, and Why?cited by 14
  6. 2022Partial Identification with Noisy Covariates: A Robust Optimization Approachcited by 10
  7. 2023Hidden yet quantifiable: A lower bound for confounding strength using randomized trialscited by 8
  8. 2022Partial Identification of Dose Responses with Hidden Confounderscited by 7
  9. 2022Quantitative probing: Validating causal models using quantitative domain knowledgecited by 6
  10. 2023Non-parametric identifiability and sensitivity analysis of synthetic control modelscited by 5
  11. 2023Front-door Adjustment Beyond Markov Equivalence with Limited Graph Knowledgecited by 4
  12. 2023Confounding-Robust Policy Improvement with Human-AI Teamscited by 4
13 more
  1. 2024Spillover Detection for Donor Selection in Synthetic Control Modelscited by 4
  2. 2022Causal Inference from Small High-dimensional Datasetscited by 3
  3. 2022Some Reflections on Drawing Causal Inference using Textual Data: Parallels Between Human Subjects and Organized Textscited by 2
  4. 2022ρ-GNF: A Copula-based Sensitivity Analysis to Unobserved Confounding Using Normalizing Flowscited by 2
  5. 2023PWSHAP: A Path-Wise Explanation Model for Targeted Variablescited by 2
  6. 2025Sensitivity Analysis to Unobserved Confounding with Copula-based Normalizing Flowscited by 1
  7. 2021Technology Readiness Levels for Machine Learning Systemscited by 0
  8. 2023Externally Valid Policy Evaluation Combining Trial and Observational Datacited by 0
  9. 2024A/B testing under Interference with Partial Network Informationcited by 0
  10. 2025Conditional Average Treatment Effect Estimation Under Hidden Confounderscited by 0
  11. 2025Mitigating Hidden Confounding by Progressive Confounder Imputation via Large Language Modelscited by 0
  12. 2026Bayesian Sensitivity of Causal Inference Estimators under Evidence-Based Priorscited by 0
  13. 2026Causal Machine Learning Is Not a Panacea: A Roadmap for Observational Causal Inference in Healthcited by 0