Improving uplift model evaluation on RCT data
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Estimating treatment effects is one of the most challenging and important tasks of data analysts. In many applications, like online marketing and personalized medicine, treatment needs to be allocated to the individuals where it yields a high positive treatment effect. Uplift models help select the right individuals for treatment and maximize the overall treatment effect (uplift). A major challenge in uplift modeling concerns model evaluation. Previous literature suggests methods like the Qini curve and the transformed outcome mean squared error. However, these metrics suffer from variance: their evaluations are strongly affected by random noise in the data, which renders their signals, to a certain degree, arbitrary. We theoretically analyze the variance of uplift evaluation metrics and derive possible methods of variance reduction, which are based on statistical adjustment of the outcome. We derive simple conditions under which the variance reduction methods improve the uplift evaluation metrics and empirically demonstrate their benefits on simulated and real-world data. Our paper provides strong evidence in favor of applying the suggested variance reduction procedures by default when evaluating uplift models on RCT data.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Oct 2022.
Builds on
16 of 56 references.
References · 16
- 2015Estimation and Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Random Forestscited by 597
- 2017Quasi-Oracle Estimation of Heterogeneous Treatment Effectscited by 328
- 2016Generalized Random Forestscited by 309
- 2015Recursive Partitioning for Heterogeneous Causal Effectscited by 254
- 2015ranger: A Fast Implementation of Random Forests for High Dimensional Data in C++ and Rcited by 171
- 2017Uplift Modeling with Multiple Treatments and General Response Typescited by 41
- 2021Evaluating Treatment Prioritization Rules via Rank-Weighted Average Treatment Effectscited by 29
- 2020Learning to rank for uplift modelingcited by 18
- 2021Machine Learning for Variance Reduction in Online Experimentscited by 17
- 2019Response Transformation and Profit Decomposition for Revenue Uplift Modelingcited by 15
- 2021A Large Scale Benchmark for Individual Treatment Effect Prediction and Uplift Modelingcited by 12
- 2016High-dimensional regression adjustments in randomized experimentscited by 10
4 more
- 2021Towards Optimal Variance Reduction in Online Controlled Experimentscited by 5
- 2020A general framework for causal classificationcited by 2
- 2019Affordable Uplift: Supervised Randomization in Controlled Experimentscited by 1
- 2022Estimating causal effects with optimization-based methods: A review and empirical comparisoncited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.