Learning to Increase the Power of Conditional Randomization Tests
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The model-X conditional randomization test is a generic framework for conditional independence testing, unlocking new possibilities to discover features that are conditionally associated with a response of interest while controlling type-I error rates. An appealing advantage of this test is that it can work with any machine learning model to design powerful test statistics. In turn, the common practice in the model-X literature is to form a test statistic using machine learning models, trained to maximize predictive accuracy with the hope to attain a test with good power. However, the ideal goal here is to drive the model (during training) to maximize the power of the test, not merely the predictive accuracy. In this paper, we bridge this gap by introducing, for the first time, novel model-fitting schemes that are designed to explicitly improve the power of model-X tests. This is done by introducing a new cost function that aims at maximizing the test statistic used to measure violations of conditional independence. Using synthetic and real data sets, we demonstrate that the combination of our proposed loss function with various base predictive models (lasso, elastic net, and deep neural networks) consistently increases the number of correct discoveries obtained, while maintaining type-I error rates under control.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 50 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Jul 2022.
Builds on
20 of 50 references.
References · 20
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
- 2019Invariant Risk Minimizationcited by 1,832
- 2019Distributionally Robust Neural Networks for Group Shifts: On the Importance of Regularization for Worst-Case Generalizationcited by 1,232
- 2019Right for the Wrong Reasons: Diagnosing Syntactic Heuristics in Natural Language Inferencecited by 864
- 2015Causal inference using invariant prediction: identification and confidence intervalscited by 533
- 2018Learning to Explain: An Information-Theoretic Perspective on Model Interpretationcited by 248
- 2016A Kernelized Stein Discrepancy for Goodness-of-fit Tests and Model Evaluationcited by 236
- 2016A Kernel Test of Goodness of Fitcited by 143
- 2014Controlling the false discovery rate via knockoffscited by 97
- 2020Removing Spurious Features can Hurt Accuracy and Affect Groups Disproportionatelycited by 52
- 2020Achieving Equalized Odds by Resampling Sensitive Attributescited by 42
- 2018DeepPINK: reproducible feature selection in deep neural networkscited by 41
8 more
- 2018Deep Knockoffscited by 40
- 2019Conditional Independence Testing using Generative Adversarial Networkscited by 36
- 2020Fast and Powerful Conditional Randomization Testing via Distillationcited by 19
- 2020Deep Direct Likelihood Knockoffscited by 13
- 2018Feature Selection using Stochastic Gatescited by 12
- 2020Relative Feature Importancecited by 12
- 2018Knockoffs for the mass: new feature importance statistics with false discovery guaranteescited by 11
- 2020Causal Inference in Genetic Trio Studiescited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 1.
2 papers.