Researcher profile

David Bruns-Smith

David Bruns-Smith contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
2topics
1close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Model-Free and Model-Based Policy Evaluation when Causality is Uncertain

When decision-makers can directly intervene, policy evaluation algorithms give valid causal estimates. In off-policy evaluation (OPE), there may exist unobserved variables that both impact the dynamics and are used by the unknown behavior policy. These "confounders" will introduce spurious correlations and naive estimates for a new policy will be biased. We develop worst-case bounds to assess sensitivity to these unobserved confounders in finite horizons when confounders are drawn iid each period. We demonstrate that a model-based approach with robust MDPs gives sharper lower bounds by exploiting domain knowledge about the dynamics. Finally, we show that when unobserved confounders are persistent over time, OPE is far more difficult and existing techniques produce extremely conservative bounds.

preprint2022arXiv

Outcome Assumptions and Duality Theory for Balancing Weights

We study balancing weight estimators, which reweight outcomes from a source population to estimate missing outcomes in a target population. These estimators minimize the worst-case error by making an assumption about the outcome model. In this paper, we show that this outcome assumption has two immediate implications. First, we can replace the minimax optimization problem for balancing weights with a simple convex loss over the assumed outcome function class. Second, we can replace the commonly-made overlap assumption with a more appropriate quantitative measure, the minimum worst-case bias. Finally, we show conditions under which the weights remain robust when our assumptions on the outcomes are wrong.