https://arxiv.org/api/FTP53nunaQO4aB+EQ8cCcYBYRnU 2026-09-11T19:59:51Z 5831 30 15 http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.07944v1 2026-09-07T19:56:29Z

Existing causal-inference benchmarks for LLMs mostly score method descriptions or whether generated code runs, not whether the executed workflow recovers the target causal estimate. CausalVerify studies this verification problem for structured econometric causal-estimation workflows by separating realistic interpretation from verifiable computation. It pairs 259 published economics papers (reconstructed research question, data description, institutional context) with 100 fixed-seed synthetic scenarios that realise CSV datasets for difference-in-differences, event study, instrumental variables, and regression discontinuity designs. Experiment A (real-paper text agreement) scores method-family and direction agreement against four-LLM consensus labels. Experiment B (synthetic execution) runs model-written R code and checks whether the extracted treatment-effect estimate matches a canonical estimator on the same realised dataset; this execution-grounded correctness layer is L2b+, distinct from L2b, which records only whether the code executes. A calibration arm asks whether self-reported confidence separates correct from incorrect workflows. On Experiment B, seven LLMs reach L2b+ pass rates of 10% to 88% at the default 50% tolerance, and 66 of the 426 workflows that execute (15.5%) return a wrong estimate. Execution ranking (L2b) agrees with L2b+ far better than text-direction scoring (L4): Kendall $τ=0.81$ and Spearman $ρ=0.93$, versus Kendall $τ$ between $-0.20$ and $0.10$ for L4. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct shows the same qualitative gap, and reported confidence does not reliably separate correct from incorrect workflows. The claims are confined to standardized single-shot workflows in these four design families under the evaluated R backend and model panel; the benchmark does not measure general causal-inference ability. Code, data, cached outputs, and a datasheet are released.

2026-09-07T19:56:29Z 22 pages, 9 figures, 12 tables. Code and data: https://github.com/causalverify/causalverify Yonghong Zhang Ricardo Correia Isabel M. Parra Yong Xie http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.11659v5 2026-09-07T19:54:25Z

Many causal questions involve outcomes distributed across mutually exclusive categories, such as votes by party, employment by status, or electricity generation by energy source, where researchers care about both the shares and the total quantity. It is well known that linear Difference-in-Differences (DiD) methods applied to category shares can produce incoherent counterfactuals and lack a discrete-choice foundation. This paper develops Compositional Difference-in-Differences (CoDiD), a framework for causal inference with categorical and compositional outcomes. For changes in category shares, I represent the underlying outcomes through a discrete copula and introduce a discrete copula stability assumption: absent treatment, the dependence structure between outcomes and group membership would remain stable over time. This assumption has two equivalent interpretations: parallel changes in relative utilities in a random-utility model and parallel trajectories in the Aitchison geometry of the simplex. A stronger assumption, parallel growth in log-counts, jointly identifies treatment effects on both category shares and the total quantity. I also provide sharp bounds when the identifying assumption is relaxed and discuss principled strategies for handling zero cells. Applying CoDiD to early voting in the 2008 U.S. presidential election, I find that the policy increased turnout by 4.4\% and the Democratic vote share by 0.92 percentage points.

2025-10-13T17:34:43Z Onil Boussim http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.07888v1 2026-09-07T18:52:34Z

Heavy-tailed and skewed outcomes are common in the randomized experiments and observational studies used to estimate heterogeneous treatment effects, yet the mean-squared-error criterion that guides splitting in honest causal trees is sensitive to the extreme values they generate. Building on the causal forest framework (Athey and Imbens, 2016; Wager and Athey, 2018), we introduce the Median Squared Deviation (MSD) criterion, which replaces the leafwise difference in means in the honest splitting objective with the Hodges--Lehmann location estimator while leaving honest leaf estimation and forest inference unchanged. Two further median-based rules, the Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) and the Least Median of Squares (LMS), serve as robust baselines. We evaluate the criteria in a simulation study covering precision, bias, and confidence interval coverage. MSD restricts its robustness to split selection and lowers the error of conditional average treatment effect estimates under heavy-tailed and skewed outcomes. Further, we re-visit two empirical applications: the first analyzes the electoral effects of a Mexican conditional cash transfer program on precinct-level observations, while the second application studies antiretroviral treatments in HIV-positive adults.

2026-09-07T18:52:34Z 63 pages Lennard Maßmann Karolina Gliszczyńska-Schroeder http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.07633v1 2026-09-07T15:28:34Z

A/B tests are standard in firm decision making. In the standard pipeline, experimental data is converted to a deployment decision by applying a t-test of the difference in means (the lift) and deploying the treatment if lift is positive and statistically significant. This common workflow answers the wrong question. We argue that firms need a decision rule for economic payoffs in the future deployment environment, not a test of equality in the experimental sample. We develop an ambiguity-averse decision framework in which each arm is evaluated by its ambiguity-penalized value over distributions close to the experimental outcome distribution. The resulting rule has a simple closed form thanks to the Donsker-Varadhan representation and it requires only the outcome data from a standard A/B test plus one interpretable parameter governing trust in the experiment. Our rule is thus no more difficult to implement than a t-test. A mean-variance approximation shows how the rule penalizes variability, while a connection to utility maximization shows it to be a certainty equivalent. We are able to perform a real-world evaluation of our proposed rule in the context of digital marketing using an archive of 552 advertising experiments from an anonymous US-based online platform. The proposed rule substantially reduces regret relative to conventional hypothesis testing. The results show that economically conservative, distribution-aware deployment rules can outperform statistical-significance rules in digital experimentation.

2026-09-07T15:28:34Z Max H. Farrell Malika Korganbekova Sanjog Misra http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.21334v4 2026-09-07T12:31:32Z

Short observational pricing panels often contain many data points but very few actual price changes. This paper shows that this sparsity creates a hidden source of error that standard statistical methods miss. When estimating price effects, most of the uncertainty does not come from sample size within a panel, but from the specific history of price movements observed. Standard confidence intervals fail because they only measure variation within the panel, ignoring this broader design-level error. Using simulations, we find that this cross-design variation accounts for most of the estimation error, causing standard methods to significantly understate uncertainty. First, we show that cross-design error decreases predictably as the total volume of price variation increases. Second, adding more data from regions that share the same price trends does not fix the issue; true precision improves only when combining data across units with independent price trajectories. Third, applying a simple variance-component adjustment across independently priced units restores accurate statistical coverage. We confirm these findings in real-world store scanner data, showing that products and pricing zones behave as if they have far fewer independent price movements than their raw counts suggest. Ultimately, reliable inference in passive pricing data requires genuine, independent variation, which can be achieved through controlled regional price testing.

2026-08-21T17:40:31Z 38 pages, 4 figures Pedro Cadahia Delgado http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.07207v1 2026-09-07T08:26:51Z

We develop a filter for time series, defined at each time $t$ as the minimizer of a discounted convex combination of observed and expected losses. The filter can be estimated by simulation to an arbitrary level of accuracy in $O(1)$ flops at each time point $t$ and can be run for all values $t=1,...,T$ in parallel. These methods are applied to robustly compute a preaveraged price process from the more than 1.5 million trades made on a single financial asset in a single day where the noise's variance is infinite. It yields a flat "volatility signature" plot, down to the 1 second level, so the microstructure noise no longer biases the volatility estimate. This is not true when linear methods are employed.

2026-09-07T08:26:51Z Simon Donker van Heel Neil Shephard http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.17478v2 2026-09-07T05:56:03Z

Instrumental-variables estimation increasingly pools many or high-dimensional instruments into a single machine-learned first stage, with rich controls partialled out. The resulting estimand, the partialled-out IV coefficient built from any signal of the instruments, is a signal-weighted average of the heterogeneous effects, which gives an opaque first stage a precise structural meaning. The average is convex whenever a covariance-monotonicity condition holds, and we provide a microfoundation for that condition based on vector monotonicity. With a learned signal, however, the usual debiased moment is not Neyman-orthogonal, and its first-order bias is a drift toward the learner's own signal-weighted average, so naive inference remains valid only for that learner-dependent target. We construct a heterogeneity-robust orthogonal score that restores $\sqrt{N}$ inference on the fixed, learner-invariant target at no efficiency cost, and provide a Hausman-type diagnostic and identification-robust confidence sets.

2026-07-20T02:00:06Z Fangzhou Yu http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.07033v1 2026-09-07T04:41:41Z

Estimating the first stage of an instrumental variables (IV) model with the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) requires choosing a dictionary of technical instruments and a penalty level. First-order asymptotic theory offers no guidance on these choices, as any consistent implementation yields a structural parameter estimator with the same limiting distribution. In finite samples, however, these choices can have a substantial impact on the resulting structural parameter estimate. Working in a model with a single endogenous regressor and homoskedastic Gaussian errors, we use first- and second-order Stein identities to derive the approximate mean squared error (AMSE) of the instrumental-variables LASSO (IV-LASSO) estimator, which can be consistently estimated and used to rank a prespecified list of dictionary-penalty candidates. The AMSE reveals a bias-variance trade-off: more complex first-stage fits better approximate the conditional mean of the endogenous variable but are also more correlated with the structural errors, with complexity measured by the degrees of freedom of the LASSO fit. The weight on this bias rises with the endogeneity of the regressor, a quantity that neither plug-in nor cross-validation penalty rules take into account. Despite the AMSE being derived in a Gaussian model, penalty selection by minimizing the feasible AMSE criterion delivers up to a one-third lower mean squared error compared to cross-validation and plug-in penalty rules in Gaussian and non-Gaussian simulation designs calibrated to the data of Gilchrist and Sands (2016).

2026-09-07T04:41:41Z Yukun Ma Manu Navjeevan Bogdan Salahub http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.06907v1 2026-09-07T01:24:03Z

Sign restrictions on the slopes of supply and demand curves are often used to identify historical decompositions in structural vector autoregressions. I show that the identifying power of these restrictions depends on both reduced-form parameters and realised forecast errors. Consequently, unlike many other structural objects, the strength of identification cannot be assessed from reduced-form parameters alone. Empirically, identified sets for historical decompositions of US inflation are typically largely uninformative, both in aggregate and in most expenditure categories. Existing inflation decompositions are therefore sensitive to auxiliary assumptions used to select among observationally equivalent models.

2026-09-07T01:24:03Z Matthew Read http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.06827v1 2026-09-06T20:48:01Z

Heterogeneous-agent New Keynesian (HANK) models characterize how entire cross-sectional distributions respond to structural shocks. Traditional representative-agent models are routinely disciplined by impulse responses from aggregate vector autoregressions (VARs). HANK models have no comparable established empirical benchmark because they make predictions not only about aggregates, but also about distributions of micro-level data. We propose a Bayesian benchmark that jointly models macroeconomic aggregates and several marginal distributions from repeated cross sections, including distributions observed in different surveys. Our approach can use both standard structural VAR identification approaches on macroeconomic aggregates and identification restrictions imposed on micro-level data. The model delivers a joint posterior of the distributional effects of shocks, without the need for household panel data or a separate first-stage density estimate.

2026-09-06T20:48:01Z Florian Huber Gary Koop Christian Matthes http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.23925v2 2026-09-06T17:59:37Z

Econometric models offer parsimonious but inexact approximations to data-generating processes. This paper studies the generalized method of moments (GMM) when exchangeable specification errors of order $n^{-1/2}$ contaminate the moment conditions. I develop estimators for the mean and variance of these specification errors, establishing their consistency in an asymptotic framework where the number of overidentifying restrictions grows with the sample size. These hyperparameter estimates are used to develop a feasible bias-corrected estimator of target parameters. I also propose an empirical Bayes estimator that weakly improves precision by subtracting a best linear predictor of the first-order estimation error from the bias-corrected estimator. Using a combinatorial central limit theorem, I establish asymptotic normality of both estimators and provide variance estimators that enable misspecification-aware frequentist inference. Simulation exercises indicate the procedures can meaningfully improve on standard two-stage least squares estimation when exclusion violations are present. Revisiting the influential study of Angrist and Krueger (1991), I consider an instrument set where exchangeable excludability violations are plausible. Repairing the two-stage least squares estimates of the returns to schooling moves them in the direction of ordinary least squares and reduces sensitivity to the specification of controls.

2026-08-25T00:10:51Z Patrick Kline http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.12629v2 2026-09-06T15:56:28Z

This article extends the dynamic programming framework introduced by Rote (2019) from the univariate to the bivariate isotonic grid problem, using an anti-diagonal traversal procedure. The proposed algorithm is applied to the well-known baseball data set that describes the association of salary with a collection of player properties, including the number of runs batted and hits. The new algorithm is relevant in the sense that dynamic programming has a wide range of applications in economics.

2026-07-14T11:07:17Z Pedro Afonso Fernandes http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.10587v1 2026-09-06T15:56:16Z

We develop an expected shortfall factor model (ESFM) to estimate and price common variation in the severity of lower-tail losses in large panels of asset returns. Mean factor models describe common variation in average returns, while quantile factor models describe common movements in tail thresholds. ESFM instead captures common variation in the average severity of losses below those thresholds. The model combines observed risk exposures with latent common factors. We estimate ESFM using an orthogonalized two-step procedure under which first-stage quantile estimation error has no first-order effect on the ES coefficient estimates. We establish nonasymptotic error bounds for the ES coefficients, a finite-sample Gaussian approximation, and consistent selection of the number of latent factors. Applied to a large panel of equities, ESFM uncovers common factors that react sharply to market stress and contain information not captured by mean and quantile factors. Average returns increase across portfolios sorted on ESFM exposure; high-minus-low portfolios earn annualized returns of 8.0%--11.7% and Fama--French five-factor alphas of 10.3%--15.0%. These spreads remain positive and statistically significant after conditioning separately and jointly on mean- and quantile-factor exposures. Tail-by-tail spanning tests show that ESFM factors retain significant alphas after controlling for standard traded factors and the corresponding mean and quantile factors. Adding ESFM to these benchmark factor sets increases the maximum attainable Sharpe ratio. These findings identify common loss severity as a distinct and priced dimension of downside risk.

2026-09-06T15:56:16Z Yujie Hou Xinbing Kong Yalin Wang Bin Wu http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.04541v3 2026-09-06T13:08:31Z

We develop estimation and inference methods for a macroeconomic model with potentially multiple behavioural equilibria, where agents form expectations using a constant-gain learning rule. We discuss identification, estimation, and inference for the structural parameters and propose uniform confidence bands for the equilibria. When equilibrium solutions are repeated, mixed convergence rates and non-standard limit distributions emerge. Monte Carlo simulations and an empirical application illustrate the finite-sample performance of our methods.

2025-12-04T07:42:46Z Alexander Mayer Davide Raggi http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.08324v3 2026-09-06T05:21:30Z

Empirical studies often estimate several synthetic-control or synthetic Difference-in-Differences effects from a common donor pool and then summarize their heterogeneity. Because the same donors enter several comparisons, the first-stage errors are jointly distributed and affect different targets differently. We characterize three regimes for linear fixed-set summaries: nonconcentration, root-rate donor exposure, and donornegligibility. We also show that removing shared-donor uncertainty from a quadratic summary requires the shared-donor covariance to vanish in every direction entering that summary. We take a valid joint first-order experiment for the effect vector as the input to the second stage. It yields simultaneous intervals for a prespecified linear family, a fixedgrid projection band, a centered effect-vector confidence region, image sets for total and explained heterogeneity and their ratio, and a sampling-center homogeneity test. For the hard-simplex SDID estimator, an operator-normalized numerical directional bootstrap re-estimates the donor and time weights in every draw. We use an exact critical-cone derivative to check the numerical approximation. In the Medicaid expansion application, omitting off-diagonal covariance understates uncertainty for the equal-jurisdiction mean but overstates it for a centered projection on the baseline uninsured rate. Persistent counterfactual mismatch is reported separately through deterministic sensitivity regions.

2026-07-09T10:08:00Z Takahiro Hoshino Makoto Nakakita