BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Emilija Perković

Emilija Perković contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
math.STMethodologyStatistics TheoryMachine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
4topics
4close 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

4 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Lost in Aggregation: The Causal Interpretation of the IV Estimand

Instrumental variable based estimation of a causal effect has emerged as a standard approach to mitigate confounding bias in the social sciences and epidemiology, where conducting randomized experiments can be too costly or impossible. However, justifying the validity of the instrument often poses a significant challenge. In this work, we highlight a problem generally neglected in arguments for instrumental variable validity: the presence of an ''aggregate treatment variable'', where the treatment (e.g., education, GDP, caloric intake) is composed of finer-grained components that each may have a different effect on the outcome. We show that the causal effect of an aggregate treatment is generally ambiguous, as it depends on how interventions on the aggregate are instantiated at the component level, formalized through the aggregate-constrained component intervention distribution. We then characterize conditions on the interventional distribution and the aggregate setting under which standard instrumental variable estimators identify the aggregate effect. The contrived nature of these conditions implies major limitations on the interpretation of instrumental variable estimates based on aggregate treatments and highlights the need for a broader justificatory base for the exclusion restriction in such settings.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Efficient least squares for estimating total effects under linearity and causal sufficiency

Recursive linear structural equation models are widely used to postulate causal mechanisms underlying observational data. In these models, each variable equals a linear combination of a subset of the remaining variables plus an error term. When there is no unobserved confounding or selection bias, the error terms are assumed to be independent. We consider estimating a total causal effect in this setting. The causal structure is assumed to be known only up to a maximally oriented partially directed acyclic graph (MPDAG), a general class of graphs that can represent a Markov equivalence class of directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) with added background knowledge. We propose a simple estimator based on recursive least squares, which can consistently estimate any identified total causal effect, under point or joint intervention. We show that this estimator is the most efficient among all regular estimators that are based on the sample covariance, which includes covariate adjustment and the estimators employed by the joint-IDA algorithm. Notably, our result holds without assuming Gaussian errors.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Minimal enumeration of all possible total effects in a Markov equivalence class

In observational studies, when a total causal effect of interest is not identified, the set of all possible effects can be reported instead. This typically occurs when the underlying causal DAG is only known up to a Markov equivalence class, or a refinement thereof due to background knowledge. As such, the class of possible causal DAGs is represented by a maximally oriented partially directed acyclic graph (MPDAG), which contains both directed and undirected edges. We characterize the minimal additional edge orientations required to identify a given total effect. A recursive algorithm is then developed to enumerate subclasses of DAGs, such that the total effect in each subclass is identified as a distinct functional of the observed distribution. This resolves an issue with existing methods, which often report possible total effects with duplicates, namely those that are numerically distinct due to sampling variability but are in fact causally identical.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Graphical Criteria for Efficient Total Effect Estimation via Adjustment in Causal Linear Models

Covariate adjustment is a commonly used method for total causal effect estimation. In recent years, graphical criteria have been developed to identify all valid adjustment sets, that is, all covariate sets that can be used for this purpose. Different valid adjustment sets typically provide total effect estimates of varying accuracies. Restricting ourselves to causal linear models, we introduce a graphical criterion to compare the asymptotic variances provided by certain valid adjustment sets. We employ this result to develop two further graphical tools. First, we introduce a simple variance reducing pruning procedure for any given valid adjustment set. Second, we give a graphical characterization of a valid adjustment set that provides the optimal asymptotic variance among all valid adjustment sets. Our results depend only on the graphical structure and not on the specific error variances or edge coefficients of the underlying causal linear model. They can be applied to directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), completed partially directed acyclic graphs (CPDAGs) and maximally oriented partially directed acyclic graphs (maximal PDAGs). We present simulations and a real data example to support our results and show their practical applicability.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access