Cross-Fitted Survey-Weighted TMLE
  • Home
  • Simulation
  • NHANES
  • Robustness
  • Methods
  • About

On this page

  • The problem
  • The estimator
  • The central result: cross-fitting restores valid inference
  • The five arms

Methods in brief

A one-page, plain-language recap. The full theory, proofs, and implementation are in the paper and its Web Appendix.

The problem

Targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) pairs machine learning with semiparametric efficiency theory to estimate causal effects. Its standard theory assumes independent observations — but complex surveys (like NHANES) have stratification, clustering, and unequal selection. Treating survey data as i.i.d. gets both pieces wrong:

  • ignoring the weights biases the point estimate (it targets a sample, not the population, quantity);
  • ignoring the clustered design understates the variance, so confidence intervals are too narrow.

The estimator

We develop a survey-aware TMLE for the population average treatment effect. Its variance is obtained by Taylor-series linearization of the estimator’s influence function, treating the primary sampling unit (PSU) as the independent replication unit. Within explicit conditions, the estimator is asymptotically normal and the linearization variance is design-consistent under a stratified multistage design.

The central result: cross-fitting restores valid inference

With flexible machine-learning nuisances, valid variance turns on cross-fitting at the PSU level: among the estimators evaluated, only out-of-fold (cross-fitted) fitting keeps coverage valid. A single-fit survey TMLE can severely under-cover once the learners cross a complexity (Donsker) boundary — and internal cluster-aware cross-validation does not substitute for cross-fitting. The simulation shows this directly: coverage collapses at the interpolating rung for single-fit, while the cross-fitted arm stays near nominal.

The five arms

Arm Weights Variance Nuisance fitting
Non-Aware ignored i.i.d. single-fit
Partially-Aware used i.i.d. single-fit
Fully-Aware used design-based single-fit
Fully-Aware-CV used design-based internal cluster-CV
Fully-Aware-CF (recommended) used design-based PSU-level cross-fitting

Fully-Aware-CF is the arm the theory covers for machine-learning nuisances.

Source Code
---
title: "Methods in brief"
---

A one-page, plain-language recap. The full theory, proofs, and implementation
are in the paper and its Web Appendix.

## The problem

Targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) pairs machine learning with
semiparametric efficiency theory to estimate causal effects. Its standard theory
assumes **independent observations** — but complex surveys (like NHANES) have
**stratification, clustering, and unequal selection**. Treating survey data as
i.i.d. gets both pieces wrong:

- ignoring the **weights** biases the point estimate (it targets a sample, not
  the population, quantity);
- ignoring the **clustered design** understates the variance, so confidence
  intervals are too narrow.

## The estimator

We develop a **survey-aware TMLE** for the population average treatment effect.
Its variance is obtained by **Taylor-series linearization** of the estimator's
influence function, treating the **primary sampling unit (PSU)** as the
independent replication unit. Within explicit conditions, the estimator is
asymptotically normal and the linearization variance is design-consistent under
a stratified multistage design.

## The central result: cross-fitting restores valid inference

With flexible machine-learning nuisances, valid variance **turns on
cross-fitting at the PSU level**: among the estimators evaluated, only
out-of-fold (cross-fitted) fitting keeps coverage valid. A single-fit survey
TMLE can severely under-cover once the learners cross a complexity (Donsker)
boundary — and
internal cluster-aware cross-validation does **not** substitute for
cross-fitting. The [simulation](simulation.qmd) shows this directly: coverage
collapses at the interpolating rung for single-fit, while the cross-fitted arm
stays near nominal.

## The five arms

| Arm | Weights | Variance | Nuisance fitting |
|---|---|---|---|
| **Non-Aware** | ignored | i.i.d. | single-fit |
| **Partially-Aware** | used | i.i.d. | single-fit |
| **Fully-Aware** | used | design-based | single-fit |
| **Fully-Aware-CV** | used | design-based | internal cluster-CV |
| **Fully-Aware-CF** *(recommended)* | used | design-based | **PSU-level cross-fitting** |

`Fully-Aware-CF` is the arm the theory covers for machine-learning nuisances.
 

Companion site to Cross-Fitted Survey-Weighted TMLE with Design-Based Variance for Causal Machine Learning. The manuscript and Web Appendix are the source of record.