-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 79
Refactored scikit-learn flavour of DifferenceInDifferences and allowed custom column names for post_treatment variable. #515
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from 2 commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -84,6 +84,7 @@ def __init__( | |
formula: str, | ||
time_variable_name: str, | ||
group_variable_name: str, | ||
post_treatment_variable_name: str = "post_treatment", | ||
model=None, | ||
**kwargs, | ||
) -> None: | ||
|
@@ -95,6 +96,7 @@ def __init__( | |
self.formula = formula | ||
self.time_variable_name = time_variable_name | ||
self.group_variable_name = group_variable_name | ||
self.post_treatment_variable_name = post_treatment_variable_name | ||
self.input_validation() | ||
|
||
y, X = dmatrices(formula, self.data) | ||
|
@@ -128,6 +130,12 @@ def __init__( | |
} | ||
self.model.fit(X=self.X, y=self.y, coords=COORDS) | ||
elif isinstance(self.model, RegressorMixin): | ||
# For scikit-learn models, automatically set fit_intercept=False | ||
# This ensures the intercept is included in the coefficients array rather than being a separate intercept_ attribute | ||
# without this, the intercept is not included in the coefficients array hence would be displayed as 0 in the model summary | ||
# TODO: later, this should be handled in ScikitLearnAdaptor itself | ||
if hasattr(self.model, "fit_intercept"): | ||
self.model.fit_intercept = False | ||
self.model.fit(X=self.X, y=self.y) | ||
else: | ||
raise ValueError("Model type not recognized") | ||
|
@@ -173,7 +181,7 @@ def __init__( | |
# just the treated group | ||
.query(f"{self.group_variable_name} == 1") | ||
# just the treatment period(s) | ||
.query("post_treatment == True") | ||
.query(f"{self.post_treatment_variable_name} == True") | ||
# drop the outcome variable | ||
.drop(self.outcome_variable_name, axis=1) | ||
# We may have multiple units per time point, we only want one time point | ||
|
@@ -189,7 +197,10 @@ def __init__( | |
# INTERVENTION: set the interaction term between the group and the | ||
# post_treatment variable to zero. This is the counterfactual. | ||
for i, label in enumerate(self.labels): | ||
if "post_treatment" in label and self.group_variable_name in label: | ||
if ( | ||
self.post_treatment_variable_name in label | ||
and self.group_variable_name in label | ||
): | ||
new_x.iloc[:, i] = 0 | ||
self.y_pred_counterfactual = self.model.predict(np.asarray(new_x)) | ||
|
||
|
@@ -198,32 +209,66 @@ def __init__( | |
# This is the coefficient on the interaction term | ||
coeff_names = self.model.idata.posterior.coords["coeffs"].data | ||
for i, label in enumerate(coeff_names): | ||
if "post_treatment" in label and self.group_variable_name in label: | ||
if ( | ||
self.post_treatment_variable_name in label | ||
and self.group_variable_name in label | ||
): | ||
self.causal_impact = self.model.idata.posterior["beta"].isel( | ||
{"coeffs": i} | ||
) | ||
elif isinstance(self.model, RegressorMixin): | ||
# This is the coefficient on the interaction term | ||
# TODO: CHECK FOR CORRECTNESS | ||
self.causal_impact = ( | ||
self.y_pred_treatment[1] - self.y_pred_counterfactual[0] | ||
).item() | ||
# Store the coefficient into dictionary {intercept:value} | ||
coef_map = dict(zip(self.labels, self.model.get_coeffs())) | ||
# Create and find the interaction term based on the values user provided | ||
interaction_term = ( | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Nice. We'll need more tests anyway to ensure test coverage, so when you do that can you add cases for when people specify formulas like There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yeah, will add some tests for a cases where a user provides post treatment variable name and check for but @drbenvincent can you elaborate on this specific test. Are we also checking the coefficient value where two interaction terms are used? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'd not thought of that. I guess it's easy to find and interaction term of the post treatment variable and something else. But if there are two interaction terms, both including the post treatment variable, then that might get messy. Can we think of any situations where that be a good idea? If not, then maybe that could throw and exception and we just say we can't deal with a formula like that? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Since our users can write any formula freely—unlike other libraries that rely on closed systems—they could specify any formula like The users can obtain estimates for exactly what they define in the formula. However, we’ve built this did object specifically for two-way Diff-in-diff with a single interaction term ?-- thus the other features might get messed up as you said. So yeah @drbenvincent I agree that we could throw exception if we encounter any two interaction term with |
||
f"{self.group_variable_name}:{self.post_treatment_variable_name}" | ||
) | ||
matched_key = next((k for k in coef_map if interaction_term in k), None) | ||
att = coef_map.get(matched_key) | ||
self.causal_impact = att | ||
else: | ||
raise ValueError("Model type not recognized") | ||
|
||
return | ||
|
||
def input_validation(self): | ||
"""Validate the input data and model formula for correctness""" | ||
if "post_treatment" not in self.formula: | ||
raise FormulaException( | ||
"A predictor called `post_treatment` should be in the formula" | ||
) | ||
|
||
if "post_treatment" not in self.data.columns: | ||
raise DataException( | ||
"Require a boolean column labelling observations which are `treated`" | ||
) | ||
# Check if post_treatment_variable_name is in formula | ||
if self.post_treatment_variable_name not in self.formula: | ||
if self.post_treatment_variable_name == "post_treatment": | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I've got a minor preference to just give one generic exception message, rather than a custom one dependent on There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yeah absolutely!! More generic ones like "Missing required variable '{self.post_treatment_variable_name}' in formula" can be used |
||
# Default case - user didn't specify custom name, so guide them to use "post_treatment" | ||
raise FormulaException( | ||
"Missing 'post_treatment' in formula.\n" | ||
"Note: post_treatment_variable_name might have been set to 'post_treatment' by default.\n" | ||
"Add 'post_treatment' to formula (e.g., 'y ~ 1 + group*post_treatment').\n" | ||
"Or to use custom name, provide additional argument post_treatment_variable_name='your_post_treatment_variable_name'." | ||
) | ||
else: | ||
# Custom case - user specified custom name, so remind them what they specified | ||
raise FormulaException( | ||
f"Missing required variable '{self.post_treatment_variable_name}' in formula.\n\n" | ||
f"Since you specified post_treatment_variable_name='{self.post_treatment_variable_name}', " | ||
f"please ensure formula includes '{self.post_treatment_variable_name}'" | ||
) | ||
|
||
# Check if post_treatment_variable_name is in data columns | ||
if self.post_treatment_variable_name not in self.data.columns: | ||
if self.post_treatment_variable_name == "post_treatment": | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Same comment as above. Just give one more generic exception message, regardless of what |
||
# Default case - user didn't specify custom name, so guide them to use "post_treatment" | ||
raise DataException( | ||
"Missing 'post_treatment' column in dataset.\n" | ||
"Note: post_treatment_variable_name might have been set to 'post_treatment' by default.\n" | ||
"Ensure dataset has boolean column 'post_treatment'.\n" | ||
"or to use custom name, provide additional argument post_treatment_variable_name='your_post_treatment_variable_name'." | ||
) | ||
else: | ||
# Custom case - user specified custom name, so remind them what they specified | ||
raise DataException( | ||
f"Missing required column '{self.post_treatment_variable_name}' in dataset.\n\n" | ||
f"Since you specified post_treatment_variable_name='{self.post_treatment_variable_name}', " | ||
f"please ensure dataset has boolean column named '{self.post_treatment_variable_name}'" | ||
) | ||
|
||
if "unit" not in self.data.columns: | ||
raise DataException( | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice