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

Peng Ding

Peng Ding contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Methodologymath.STStatistics TheoryApplicationsecon.EMMachine LearningComputation and Language

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
14works
0followers
7topics
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

14 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

SOP-Maze: Evaluating Large Language Models on Complicated Business Standard Operating Procedures

As large language models (LLMs) are widely deployed as domain-specific agents, many benchmarks have been proposed to evaluate their ability to follow instructions and make decisions in real-world scenarios. However, business scenarios often involve complex standard operating procedures (SOPs), and the evaluation of LLM capabilities in such contexts has not been fully explored. To bridge this gap, we propose SOP-Maze, a benchmark constructed from real-world business data and adapted into a collection of 397 instances and 3422 subtasks from 23 complex SOP scenarios. We further categorize SOP tasks into two broad classes: Lateral Root System (LRS), representing wide-option tasks that demand precise selection; and Heart Root System (HRS), which emphasizes deep logical reasoning with complex branches. Extensive experiments reveal that nearly all state-of-the-art models struggle with SOP-Maze. We conduct a comprehensive analysis and identify three key error categories: (i) route blindness: difficulty following procedures; (ii) conversational fragility: inability to handle real dialogue nuances; and (iii) calculation errors: mistakes in time or arithmetic reasoning under complex contexts. The systematic study explores LLM performance across SOP tasks that challenge both breadth and depth, offering new insights for improving model capabilities. We have open-sourced our work on: https://github.com/meituan-longcat/SOP-Maze.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2023arXiv

An instrumental variable method for point processes: generalised Wald estimation based on deconvolution

Point processes are probabilistic tools for modeling event data. While there exists a fast-growing literature studying the relationships between point processes, it remains unexplored how such relationships connect to causal effects. In the presence of unmeasured confounders, parameters from point process models do not necessarily have causal interpretations. We propose an instrumental variable method for causal inference with point process treatment and outcome. We define causal quantities based on potential outcomes and establish nonparametric identification results with a binary instrumental variable. We extend the traditional Wald estimation to deal with point process treatment and outcome, showing that it should be performed after a Fourier transform of the intention-to-treat effects on the treatment and outcome and thus takes the form of deconvolution. We term this as the generalised Wald estimation and propose an estimation strategy based on well-established deconvolution methods.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2023arXiv

Kernel-based off-policy estimation without overlap: Instance optimality beyond semiparametric efficiency

We study optimal procedures for estimating a linear functional based on observational data. In many problems of this kind, a widely used assumption is strict overlap, i.e., uniform boundedness of the importance ratio, which measures how well the observational data covers the directions of interest. When it is violated, the classical semi-parametric efficiency bound can easily become infinite, so that the instance-optimal risk depends on the function class used to model the regression function. For any convex and symmetric function class $\mathcal{F}$, we derive a non-asymptotic local minimax bound on the mean-squared error in estimating a broad class of linear functionals. This lower bound refines the classical semi-parametric one, and makes connections to moduli of continuity in functional estimation. When $\mathcal{F}$ is a reproducing kernel Hilbert space, we prove that this lower bound can be achieved up to a constant factor by analyzing a computationally simple regression estimator. We apply our general results to various families of examples, thereby uncovering a spectrum of rates that interpolate between the classical theories of semi-parametric efficiency (with $\sqrt{n}$-consistency) and the slower minimax rates associated with non-parametric function estimation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Asymptotic causal inference with observational studies trimmed by the estimated propensity scores

Causal inference with observational studies often relies on the assumptions of unconfoundedness and overlap of covariate distributions in different treatment groups. The overlap assumption is violated when some units have propensity scores close to 0 or 1, and therefore both practical and theoretical researchers suggest dropping units with extreme estimated propensity scores. However, existing trimming methods ignore the uncertainty in this design stage and restrict inference only to the trimmed sample, due to the non-smoothness of the trimming. We propose a smooth weighting, which approximates the existing sample trimming but has better asymptotic properties. An advantage of the new smoothly weighted estimator is its asymptotic linearity, which ensures that the bootstrap can be used to make inference for the target population, incorporating uncertainty arising from both the design and analysis stages. We also extend the theory to the average treatment effect on the treated, suggesting trimming samples with estimated propensity scores close to 1.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Design-based theory for cluster rerandomization

Complete randomization balances covariates on average, but covariate imbalance often exists in finite samples. Rerandomization can ensure covariate balance in the realized experiment by discarding the undesired treatment assignments. Many field experiments in public health and social sciences assign the treatment at the cluster level due to logistical constraints or policy considerations. Moreover, they are frequently combined with rerandomization in the design stage. We refer to cluster rerandomization as a cluster-randomized experiment compounded with rerandomization to balance covariates at the individual or cluster level. Existing asymptotic theory can only deal with rerandomization with treatments assigned at the individual level, leaving that for cluster rerandomization an open problem. To fill the gap, we provide a design-based theory for cluster rerandomization. Moreover, we compare two cluster rerandomization schemes that use prior information on the importance of the covariates: one based on the weighted Euclidean distance and the other based on the Mahalanobis distance with tiers of covariates. We demonstrate that the former dominates the latter with optimal weights and orthogonalized covariates. Last but not least, we discuss the role of covariate adjustment in the analysis stage and recommend covariate-adjusted procedures that can be conveniently implemented by least squares with the associated robust standard errors.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Multiply robust estimation of causal effects under principal ignorability

Causal inference concerns not only the average effect of the treatment on the outcome but also the underlying mechanism through an intermediate variable of interest. Principal stratification characterizes such a mechanism by targeting subgroup causal effects within principal strata, which are defined by the joint potential values of an intermediate variable. Due to the fundamental problem of causal inference, principal strata are inherently latent, rendering it challenging to identify and estimate subgroup effects within them. A line of research leverages the principal ignorability assumption that the latent principal strata are mean independent of the potential outcomes conditioning on the observed covariates. Under principal ignorability, we derive various nonparametric identification formulas for causal effects within principal strata in observational studies, which motivate estimators relying on the correct specifications of different parts of the observed-data distribution. Appropriately combining these estimators yields triply robust estimators for the causal effects within principal strata. These triply robust estimators are consistent if two of the treatment, intermediate variable, and outcome models are correctly specified, and moreover, they are locally efficient if all three models are correctly specified. We show that these estimators arise naturally from either the efficient influence functions in the semiparametric theory or the model-assisted estimators in the survey sampling theory. We evaluate different estimators based on their finite-sample performance through simulation and apply them to two observational studies.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Posterior Predictive Propensity Scores and $p$-Values

\citet{Rosenbaum83ps} introduced the notion of the propensity score and discussed its central role in causal inference with observational studies. Their paper, however, caused a fundamental incoherence with an early paper by \citet{Rubin78}, which showed that the propensity score does not play any role in the Bayesian analysis of unconfounded observational studies if the priors on the propensity score and outcome models are independent. Despite the serious efforts made in the literature, it is generally difficult to reconcile these contradicting results. We offer a simple approach to incorporating the propensity score in Bayesian causal inference based on the posterior predictive $p$-value. To motivate a simple procedure, we focus on the model with the strong null hypothesis of no causal effects for any units whatsoever. Computationally, the proposed posterior predictive $p$-value equals the classic $p$-value based on the Fisher randomization test averaged over the posterior predictive distribution of the propensity score. Moreover, using the studentized doubly robust estimator as the test statistic, the proposed $p$-value inherits the doubly robust property and is also asymptotically valid for testing the weak null hypothesis of zero average causal effect. Perhaps surprisingly, this Bayesianly motivated $p$-value can have better frequentist's finite-sample performance than the frequentist's $p$-value based on the asymptotic approximation especially when the propensity scores can take extreme values.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Multi-Source Causal Inference Using Control Variates

While many areas of machine learning have benefited from the increasing availability of large and varied datasets, the benefit to causal inference has been limited given the strong assumptions needed to ensure identifiability of causal effects; these are often not satisfied in real-world datasets. For example, many large observational datasets (e.g., case-control studies in epidemiology, click-through data in recommender systems) suffer from selection bias on the outcome, which makes the average treatment effect (ATE) unidentifiable. We propose a general algorithm to estimate causal effects from \emph{multiple} data sources, where the ATE may be identifiable only in some datasets but not others. The key idea is to construct control variates using the datasets in which the ATE is not identifiable. We show theoretically that this reduces the variance of the ATE estimate. We apply this framework to inference from observational data under outcome selection bias, assuming access to an auxiliary small dataset from which we can obtain a consistent estimate of the ATE. We construct a control variate by taking the difference of the odds ratio estimates from the two datasets. Across simulations and two case studies with real data, we show that this control variate can significantly reduce the variance of the ATE estimate.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Is being an only child harmful to psychological health?: Evidence from an instrumental variable analysis of China's One-Child Policy

This paper evaluates the effects of being an only child in a family on psychological health, leveraging data on the One-Child Policy in China. We use an instrumental variable approach to address the potential unmeasured confounding between the fertility decision and psychological health, where the instrumental variable is an index on the intensity of the implementation of the One-Child Policy. We establish an analytical link between the local instrumental variable approach and principal stratification to accommodate the continuous instrumental variable. Within the principal stratification framework, we postulate a Bayesian hierarchical model to infer various causal estimands of policy interest while adjusting for the clustering data structure. We apply the method to the data from the China Family Panel Studies and find small but statistically significant negative effects of being an only child on self-reported psychological health for some subpopulations. Our analysis reveals treatment effect heterogeneity with respect to both observed and unobserved characteristics. In particular, urban males suffer the most from being only children, and the negative effect has larger magnitude if the families were more resistant to the One-Child Policy. We also conduct sensitivity analysis to assess the key instrumental variable assumption.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Overlap in Observational Studies with High-Dimensional Covariates

Estimating causal effects under exogeneity hinges on two key assumptions: unconfoundedness and overlap. Researchers often argue that unconfoundedness is more plausible when more covariates are included in the analysis. Less discussed is the fact that covariate overlap is more difficult to satisfy in this setting. In this paper, we explore the implications of overlap in observational studies with high-dimensional covariates and formalize curse-of-dimensionality argument, suggesting that these assumptions are stronger than investigators likely realize. Our key innovation is to explore how strict overlap restricts global discrepancies between the covariate distributions in the treated and control populations. Exploiting results from information theory, we derive explicit bounds on the average imbalance in covariate means under strict overlap and show that these bounds become more restrictive as the dimension grows large. We discuss how these implications interact with assumptions and procedures commonly deployed in observational causal inference, including sparsity and trimming.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Regression adjustment in completely randomized experiments with a diverging number of covariates

Randomized experiments have become important tools in empirical research. In a completely randomized treatment-control experiment, the simple difference in means of the outcome is unbiased for the average treatment effect, and covariate adjustment can further improve the efficiency without assuming a correctly specified outcome model. In modern applications, experimenters often have access to many covariates, motivating the need for a theory of covariate adjustment under the asymptotic regime with a diverging number of covariates. We study the asymptotic properties of covariate adjustment under the potential outcomes model and propose a bias-corrected estimator that is consistent and asymptotically normal under weaker conditions. Our theory is purely randomization-based without imposing any parametric outcome model assumptions. To prove the theoretical results, we develop novel vector and matrix concentration inequalities for sampling without replacement.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Rerandomization and Regression Adjustment

Randomization is a basis for the statistical inference of treatment effects without strong assumptions on the outcome-generating process. Appropriately using covariates further yields more precise estimators in randomized experiments. R. A. Fisher suggested blocking on discrete covariates in the design stage or conducting analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) in the analysis stage. We can embed blocking into a wider class of experimental design called rerandomization, and extend the classical ANCOVA to more general regression adjustment. Rerandomization trumps complete randomization in the design stage, and regression adjustment trumps the simple difference-in-means estimator in the analysis stage. It is then intuitive to use both rerandomization and regression adjustment. Under the randomization-inference framework, we establish a unified theory allowing the designer and analyzer to have access to different sets of covariates. We find that asymptotically (a) for any given estimator with or without regression adjustment, rerandomization never hurts either the sampling precision or the estimated precision, and (b) for any given design with or without rerandomization, our regression-adjusted estimator never hurts the estimated precision. Therefore, combining rerandomization and regression adjustment yields better coverage properties and thus improves statistical inference. To theoretically quantify these statements, we discuss optimal regression-adjusted estimators in terms of the sampling precision and the estimated precision, and then measure the additional gains of the designer and the analyzer. We finally suggest using rerandomization in the design and regression adjustment in the analysis followed by the Huber--White robust standard error.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Two seemingly paradoxical results in linear models: the variance inflation factor and the analysis of covariance

A result from a standard linear model course is that the variance of the ordinary least squares (OLS) coefficient of a variable will never decrease when including additional covariates. The variance inflation factor (VIF) measures the increase of the variance. Another result from a standard linear model or experimental design course is that including additional covariates in a linear model of the outcome on the treatment indicator will never increase the variance of the OLS coefficient of the treatment at least asymptotically. This technique is called the analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), which is often used to improve the efficiency of treatment effect estimation. So we have two paradoxical results: adding covariates never decreases the variance in the first result but never increases the variance in the second result. In fact, these two results are derived under different assumptions. More precisely, the VIF result conditions on the treatment indicators but the ANCOVA result averages over them. Comparing the estimators with and without adjusting for additional covariates in a completely randomized experiment, I show that the former has smaller variance averaging over the treatment indicators, and the latter has smaller variance at the cost of a larger bias conditioning on the treatment indicators. Therefore, there is no real paradox.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access