Retail marketing measurement increasingly requires granular campaign-level insights without relying on user-level tracking. However, the two dominant approaches, Marketing Mix Modeling (MMM) and Multi-Touch Attribution (MTA), often produce fragmented insights. MMM is privacy-safe and robust for channel-level planning but is too coarse for campaign optimization, while MTA provides granular attribution but has become less reliable under increasing privacy restrictions. We propose Integrated Marketing Attribution (IMA), a unified framework that combines MMM with channel specific Bayesian attribution models to derive campaign-level effects from aggregated data. By leveraging MMM-informed priors, IMA delivers granular, privacy-safe attribution while preserving consistency with MMM.
Advertising platforms use randomized lift tests to measure incrementality, but privacy-preserving reporting systems degrade the observed signal through match-rate loss, linkability loss, attribution-window loss, aggregation-threshold suppression, randomized reporting noise, and segment-heterogeneous signal loss. This paper formulates privacy-constrained advertising measurement as a robust causal decision problem under the mentioned signal losses. Given a randomized experiment and an ambiguity set for privacy-induced degradation, the framework projects the observation-compatible fiber of clean/unfiltered experimental worlds onto the incrementality functional and returns certified, rejected, and unresolved decisions. The main result gives a sharp decision frontier. Reports outside the frontier support uniformly valid certification or rejection, whereas reports inside it contain too little information for any method to uniformly distinguish above-threshold incrementality from non-incrementality. Supporting results give finite-sample certification, sample-complexity guarantees, a minimax lower bound showing that signal loss reduces effective information, and a reporting-granularity tradeoff. On 2.0M Criteo Uplift rows and the 64K-row Hillstrom email experiment, clean conversion lift is positive in both datasets, with lifts 0.00112 and 0.00495, respectively. Population certification survives mild degradation in Criteo and severe degradation in Hillstrom, while all considered finite-sample stress settings in both datasets remain unresolved after simultaneous uncertainty and reporting noise are included. Overall, the research contributes a decision-theoretic layer for privacy-aware incrementality measurement whose output is the strongest causal-claim justified by degraded ads signals.
In large-scale paid acquisition and growth advertising systems, production attribution outputs are widely used for daily budget allocation and channel diagnosis. However, paid-attributed conversions such as daily new users (DNU) may systematically overstate true incremental growth when paid channels overlap with organic demand, brand-driven traffic, or other acquisition channels. This attribution-cannibalization mismatch can distort incremental ROI measurement and budget decisions at scale. We propose an experiment-calibrated attribution correction framework that uses incrementality experiments as causal anchors to convert sparse lift measurements into daily correction estimates. To make the corrected signal actionable at production granularity, we further allocate calibrated cannibalization volume across business hierarchies under structural consistency constraints. Offline forward-in-time validation against channel-level incrementality experiment readouts shows that the proposed framework substantially reduces calibration error relative to raw attribution and fine-grained ML baselines. Deployed across multiple global TikTok markets, the system supported budget and traffic strategy adjustments that were followed by an approximately 15-percentage-point reduction in the measured cannibalization rate.
Marketing mix models are used to forecast business outcomes and to attribute those outcomes to marketing channels, but these goals are not equivalent. We study a failure mode in graph-based neural MMM called attribution bypass: a high-capacity decoder can obtain low forecasting error through target autoregression, dense communication, co-movement, context, or latent memory while failing to route counterfactual sensitivity through the graph used as the attribution object. We introduce DICE-MMM as a bounded diagnostic and training framework. We do not claim that observational neural MMM identifies causal effects. Instead, DICE separates three questions often conflated in graph-based MMM: graph recovery, forecasting accuracy, and whether the trained decoder's perturbation-induced influence is graph aligned. Stage 1 trains a graph encoder with a restricted graph-mediated decoder. Stage 2 freezes the selected encoder and trains a graph-safe latent decoder whose cross-node communication must pass through the supplied graph. Decoder use is evaluated with CIG, AR-CIG, and graph-swap tests. Across controlled R/d/T swaps and an external multi-graph rawlog stress test, DICE improves stable graph recovery over CausalMMM. The experiments show that forecasting accuracy is not an attribution certificate: in a sparse-target benchmark, no-graph and full-graph decoders achieve MSE@7 around 0.004 while AR-CIG nAUPRC remains near or below zero, whereas an oracle graph reaches 0.807 +/- 0.129 at comparable MSE. Frozen graph-swap localizes the bottleneck: the same DICE-hard-trained decoder moves from nAUPRC -0.044 +/- 0.006 under learned graph inputs to 0.894 +/- 0.027 with the oracle graph. The contribution is a stress test and failure-localization framework showing that low MSE can hide attribution bypass and that the unresolved bottleneck is graph-support selection, not forecasting or decoder capacity.