Peer effects are difficult to estimate when interaction graphs evolve because pre-assignment network history, dynamic peer exposure, and post-assignment network change have distinct causal roles. We introduce a controlled contrast framework that indexes potential outcomes by own treatment, temporally aggregated peer exposure, and a post-assignment evolution summary. Differences between the resulting means define own-treatment, peer-exposure, controlled network-evolution, and joint controlled contrasts rather than a mediation decomposition. We develop the Dynamic Network Doubly Robust estimator, DynaNet-DR, which combines a temporally factorized propensity with normalized augmentation. Under consistency, summary sufficiency, sequential exchangeability, positivity, nuisance convergence, and weak dependence, its canonical estimator is consistent when either the outcome regression or the propensity estimator is consistent. The reported implementation adds representative-score prediction, fixed clipping, and finite-sample stabilization. Semi-synthetic benchmarks on fixed real temporal graph sequences show favorable estimation accuracy among methods targeting the full profile. These benchmarks assess summary-indexed contrasts rather than counterfactual edge generation, and the MathOverflow study is an observational illustration under the stated assumptions.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Controlled comparisons for focal unit i . Each panel varies one highlighted feature while holding the others fixed.
Figure 2: Time ordering. Peer treatments are aggregated over pre-assignment graphs into Zit . The post-assignment summary Mi,t+1 precedes the outcome. The generated trait Ui is included by default and withheld in the sensitivity analysis.
Dataset
Method
DE
PE
CNE
JCC
Coverage
CollegeMsg
Naive-A
0.722 ± 0.042
0.552 ± 0.000
0.326 ± 0.000
0.157 ± 0.043
0.00
Static-Z OR
0.099 ± 0.043
0.354 ± 0.029
0.326 ± 0.000
0.591 ± 0.055
0.01
Static-Z DR
0.103 ± 0.024
0.279 ± 0.051
0.326 ± 0.000
0.503 ± 0.054
0.10
GPS †
0.147 ± 0.025
0.417 ± 0.044
0.326 ± 0.000
0.878 ± 0.056
0.00
DynInt †
0.069 ± 0.032
0.062 ± 0.026
0.326 ± 0.000
0.254 ± 0.053
0.04
TL †
0.056 ± 0.021
0.053 ± 0.034
0.049 ± 0.028
0.044 ± 0.029
0.17
Table 1: RMSE by contrast family and empirical coverage of node-clustered nominal intervals. Bold marks the lowest RMSE among full-target implementations, and † denotes adaptations. Restricted designs have different targets, and coverage is descriptive.
Variant
College
Email
Primary
High
Full
.047 ± .011
.052 ± .021
.126 ± .045
.083 ± .027
λ=1
.052 ± .022
.077 ± .021
.206 ± .123
.110 ± .040
Plug-in
.064 ± .019
.056 ± .020
.125 ± .045
.111 ± .050
No M
.199 ± .005
.203 ± .006
.231 ± .041
.202 ± .010
No M + plug-in
.206 ± .007
.204 ± .007
.231 ± .040
.219 ± .017
No- M IPW
.288 ± .058
.318 ± .044
.341 ± .111
.371 ± .088
Table 2: Mean ± SD overall RMSE across seven contrasts. Full denotes DynaNet-DR with its adaptive gate. Bold marks the dataset minimum. The λ=1 and plug-in rows share the full target; the other variants have target mismatch.
CollegeMsg
email-Eu
Method
Default
Outcome
Prop.
Default
Outcome
Prop.
OR
.064 (.019)
.421 (.047)
.064 (.019)
.056 (.020)
.474 (.094)
.056 (.020)
No- M IPW
.288 (.058)
.288 (.058)
.305 (.050)
.318 (.044)
.318 (.044)
.403 (.042)
TL
.054 (.022)
.205 (.069)
.052 (.023)
.093 (.026)
.170 (.050)
.101 (.030)
GML-DR
.053 (.023)
.242 (.060)
.051 (.020)
.081 (.023)
.222 (.052)
.088 (.027)
DynaNet
.047 (.011)
.213 (.069)
.046 (.014)
.052 (.021)
.277 (.047)
.053 (.018)
Table 3: Mean overall RMSE, with SD in parentheses. OR is the full-target plug-in outcome regression, and DynaNet denotes DynaNet-DR. Bold marks each minimum. Outcome and Prop. restrict one nuisance model; only No- M IPW has target mismatch.
Figure 3: Mean estimates and benchmark truths for seven contrasts on CollegeMsg and email-Eu. Error bars are one standard deviation across replications, not confidence intervals. Appendix defines the targets; Appendix reports the other networks.
Figure 4: DynaNet-DR overall RMSE and empirical coverage by clip bound. Bands show one standard deviation; dashed line marks c=0.02 .
Evaluating network interventions requires understanding how treatment affects people through their social relationships. Counting treated neighbors without distinguishing supportive and antagonistic ties can conceal opposing influences. We define effects through positive and negative ties, their interaction, and a sign-composition effect of reallocating treatment between the two types at a fixed total, and give their identification formulas. Under sign-blind assignment, we show how ignoring signs mixes the effects of the two tie types. We propose SiDE (Signed-exposure Doubly robust Estimator), which combines sign-specific outcome models with exposure probabilities induced by individual treatment assignment. We establish double robustness of its score and assess approximate intervals that account for overlapping neighborhoods. Semi-synthetic experiments on six real signed networks demonstrate accurate effect estimation and examine the limits of interval coverage. An exploratory reanalysis of published school-experiment data yields a positive estimate of the peer effect through spend-time ties on wristband wearing, but the intervals for all four effects include zero after adjustment for multiple comparisons. This framework can inform network intervention design by showing when influences through the two tie types reinforce or offset one another.
Xiaojing Du, Jiuyong Li, Lin Liu +3
Adelaide University, Adelaide, Australia · Hainan University, Haikou, China
Estimating individual treatment effect (ITE) from observational graph data is crucial for decision-making in the fields such as commerce and medicine. This task is challenging due to interference, where individual outcomes can be influenced by the treatments and covariates of their neighbors. Existing methods attempt to model such interference for accurate ITE estimation. However, a critical issue is often overlooked: differentiated networked effect (DNE), an effect caused by local networks consisting of neighbors with varying importance and scales. Capturing DNE is vital; otherwise, we will end up with imprecise ITE estimation due to an erroneous characterization of interference, which can result in misguided decisions. To address this challenge, we propose a novel interference modeling mechanism that incorporates two partial attention mechanisms and a message amplifier. The partial attention mechanisms automatically estimate the importance of different neighbors in contributing to interference, while the message amplifier adjusts the results of the interference modeling mechanism based on the scale of neighbors, all of which enables the model to capture DNE. Experiments on three real-world graphs demonstrate that our methods outperform existing approaches for ITE estimation from graph data, which corroborates the importance of explicitly capturing DNE.
Xiaofeng Lin, Han Bao, Hisashi Kashima
Kyoto University Kyoto, Japan · The Institute of Statistical Mathematics Tokyo, Japan · Tohoku University Sendai, Japan +1
We propose a novel doubly robust neural mean-embedding framework for proxy causal learning (PCL) for continuous and structured treatments. PCL uses proxy variables and bridge functions to identify causal effects under unobserved confounding: either an outcome bridge or a treatment bridge can identify the target, while doubly robust methods combine both. Our framework learns both bridges with data-adaptive neural features and combines them into doubly robust estimators of population, treatment-conditional, and heterogeneous dose-response functions. Two features of our result are particularly notable: the treatment bridge can be learned without density ratios, and the same treatment bridge yields both population and heterogeneous responses, eliminating the need for a separate bridge fit. Our analysis shows that the doubly robust error is controlled by final-stage error and the smaller of the two projected bridge errors, with no separate density-ratio estimation error. Across challenging continuous- and structured-treatment benchmarks, our method outperforms neural single-bridge estimators and fixed-feature doubly robust estimators. Our implementation is available at https://github.com/BariscanBozkurt/DoublyRobust-PCL-Network.