Algorithms and Complexities of Matching Variants in Covariate Balancing

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2022.2286

References

  • Ágoston KC, Biró P, Szántó R (2018) Stable project allocation under distributional constraints. Oper. Res. Perspect. 5:59–68.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Ahuja RK, Orlin JB, Magnanti TL (1993) Network Flows: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications. (Prentice-Hall, Hoboken, NJ).Google Scholar
  • Ashlagi I, Saberi A, Shameli A (2020) Assignment mechanisms under distributional constraints. Oper. Res. 68(2):467–479. AbstractGoogle Scholar
  • Bei X, Liu S, Poon CK, Wang H (2020) Candidate selections with proportional fairness constraints. Proc. 19th Internat. Conf. Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, 150–158.Google Scholar
  • Bennett M, Vielma JP, Zubizarreta JR (2020) Building representative matched samples with multi-valued treatments in large observational studies. J. Comput. Graph. Stat. 29(4):744–757.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Brookhart MA, Schneeweiss S, Rothman KJ, Glynn RJ, Avorn J, Stürmer T (2006) Variable selection for propensity score models. Am. J. Epidemiol. 163(12):1149–1156.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Busaker R, Gowen PJ (1961) A procedure for determining minimal-cost network flow patterns. Technical report, ORO Technical Report 15, Operational Research Office, John Hopkins University.Google Scholar
  • Dutta S, Jacobson SH, Sauppe JJ (2017) Identifying NCAA Tournament upsets using balance optimization subset selection. J. Quant. Anal. Sports. 13(2):79–93.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Edmonds J, Karp RM (1972) Theoretical improvements in algorithmic efficiency for network flow problems. J. ACM 19(2):248–264.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Ho DE, Imai K, King G, Stuart EA (2007) Matching as nonparametric preprocessing for reducing model dependence in parametric causal inference. Polit. Anal. 15(3):199–236. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hochbaum DS, Rao X, Sauppe J (2022) Network flow methods for the minimum covariate imbalance problem. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 300(3):827–836.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Imbens GW (2004) Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity: A review. Rev. Econ. Stat. 86(1):4–29.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Iri M (1960) A new method of solving transportation-network problems. J. Oper. Res. Soc. Japan. 3(1):2–87.Google Scholar
  • Jewell WS (1958) Optimal flow through networks. Oper. Res. 6:633–633.Google Scholar
  • Kannan R (1983) Improved algorithms for integer programming and related lattice problems. Johnson DS, Fagin R, Fredman ML, Harel D, Karp RM, Lynch NA, Papadimitriou CH, Rivest RL, Ruzzo WL, Seiferas JI, eds., Proc. 15th Annual ACM Sympos. on Theory of Comput., 25-27 April, 1983, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 193–206 (ACM), http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/800061.808749.Google Scholar
  • Karmakar B, Small D, Rosenbaum P (2019) Using approximation algorithms to build evidence factors and related designs for observational studies. J. Comput. Graph. Statist. 28(3):698–709.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • King G, Lucas C, Nielsen RA (2017) The balance-sample size frontier in matching methods for causal inference. Am. J. Pol. Sci. 61:473–489. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kwon HY (2018) New developments in causal inference using balance optimization subset selection. Ph.D. thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
  • Kwon HY, Sauppe JJ, Jacobson SH (2019a) Bias in balance optimization subset selection: Exploration through examples. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 70(1):67–80.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kwon HY, Sauppe JJ, Jacobson SH (2019b) Treatment effect decomposition and bootstrap hypothesis testing in observational studies. Annals of Data Science 6(3):491–511.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kwon HY, Sauppe JJ, Jacobson SH (2020) Duality in balance optimization subset selection. Ann. Oper. Res. 289:277–289.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Lenstra Jr. HW (1983) Integer programming with a fixed number of variables. Math. Oper. Res. 8(4):538–548.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Morgan SL, Harding DJ (2006) Matching estimators of causal effects: Prospects and pitfalls in theory and practice. Sociol. Methods Res. 35(1):3–60.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Mulmuley K, Vazirani U, Vazirani V (1987) Matching is as easy as matrix inversion. Combinatorica. 7(1):105–113.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Nguyen T, Vohra R (2019) Stable matching with proportionality constraints. Oper. Res. 67(6):1503–1519.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Nguyen T, Nguyen H, Teytelboym A (2019) Stability in matching markets with complex constraints. Management Sci. 67(12):7291–7950.Google Scholar
  • Nikolaev AG, Jacobson SH, Cho WKT, Sauppe JJ, Sewell EC (2013) Balance optimization subset selection (boss): An alternative approach for causal inference with observational data. Oper. Res. 61(2):398–412.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Papadimitriou CH, Yannakakis M (1982) The complexity of restricted spanning tree problems. J. ACM. 29(2):285–309.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Pimentel SD, Kelz RR, Silber JH, Rosenbaum PR (2015) Large, sparse optimal matching with refined covariate balance in an observational study of the health outcomes produced by new surgeons. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 110 (510):515–527. Google Scholar
  • Rosenbaum PR (2002) Overt Bias in Observational Studies. (Springer, New York), 71–104.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Rosenbaum PR (2012) Optimal matching of an optimally chosen subset in observational studies. J. Comput. Graph. Statist. 21:57–71. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Rosenbaum PR (2020) Modern algorithms for matching in observational studies. Annu. Rev. Stat. Appl. 7:143–176.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Rosenbaum PR, Ross RN, Silber JH (2007) Minimum distance matched sampling with fine balance in an observational study of treatment for ovarian cancer. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 102(477):75–83.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Rubin DB, Stuart EA (2006) Affinely invariant matching methods with discriminant mixtures of proportional ellipsoidally symmetric distributions. Ann. Statist. 34(4):1814–1826.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Sauppe JJ (2015) Balance optimization subset selection: A framework for causal inference with observational data. Ph.D. thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
  • Sauppe JJ, Jacobson SH (2017) The role of covariate balance in observational studies. Naval Res. Logist. 64(4):323–344.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Sauppe JJ, Jacobson SH, Sewell EC (2014) Complexity and approximation results for the balance optimization subset selection model for causal inference in observational studies. INFORMS J. Comput. 26(3):547–566.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Sharma D, Willy C, Bischoff J (2020) Optimal subset selection for causal inference using machine learning ensembles and particle swarm optimization. Complex Intel. Sys. 7:41–59.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Stuart EA (2010) Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Statistical science: a review journal of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics 25(1):1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/09-STS313.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Tam Cho WK, Sauppe JJ, Nikolaev AG, Jacobson SH, Sewell EC (2013) An optimization approach for making causal inferences. Stat. Neerl. 67(2):211–226. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Tomizawa N (1971) On some techniques useful for solution of transportation network problems. Networks 1(2):173–194.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Visconti G, Zubizarreta JR (2018) Handling limited overlap in observational studies with cardinality matching. Observational Studies. 4:217–249.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Yahiro K, Zhang Y, Barrot N, Yokoo M (2020) Strategyproof and fair matching mechanism for ratio constraints. Auton. Agent. Multi Agent Syst. 34(1):1–29.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Yang D, Small DS, Silber JH, Rosenbaum PR (2012) Optimal matching with minimal deviation from fine balance in a study of obesity and surgical outcomes. Biometrics 68(2):628–636.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Zubizarreta JR (2012) Using mixed integer programming for matching in an observational study of kidney failure after surgery. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 107(500):1360–1371.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Zubizarreta JR, Paredes RD, Rosenbaum PR (2014) Matching for balance, pairing for heterogeneity in an observational study of the effectiveness of for-profit and not-for-profit high schools in Chile. Ann. Appl. Stat. 8:204–231.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.