home / skills / aj-geddes / useful-ai-prompts / causal-inference
This skill helps you estimate causal effects and policy impacts using propensity scores, instrumental variables, and causal graphs for observational data.
npx playbooks add skill aj-geddes/useful-ai-prompts --skill causal-inferenceReview the files below or copy the command above to add this skill to your agents.
---
name: Causal Inference
description: Determine cause-and-effect relationships using propensity scoring, instrumental variables, and causal graphs for policy evaluation and treatment effects
---
# Causal Inference
## Overview
Causal inference determines cause-and-effect relationships and estimates treatment effects, going beyond correlation to understand what causes what.
## When to Use
- Evaluating the impact of policy interventions or business decisions
- Estimating treatment effects when randomized experiments aren't feasible
- Controlling for confounding variables in observational data
- Determining if a marketing campaign or product change caused an outcome
- Analyzing heterogeneous treatment effects across different user segments
- Making causal claims from non-experimental data using propensity scores or instrumental variables
## Key Concepts
- **Treatment**: Intervention or exposure
- **Outcome**: Result or consequence
- **Confounding**: Variables affecting both treatment and outcome
- **Causal Graph**: Visual representation of relationships
- **Treatment Effect**: Impact of intervention
- **Selection Bias**: Non-random treatment assignment
## Causal Methods
- **Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT)**: Gold standard
- **Propensity Score Matching**: Balance treatment/control
- **Difference-in-Differences**: Before/after comparison
- **Instrumental Variables**: Handle endogeneity
- **Causal Forests**: Heterogeneous treatment effects
## Implementation with Python
```python
import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import seaborn as sns
from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression, LogisticRegression
from sklearn.preprocessing import StandardScaler
from scipy import stats
# Generate observational data with confounding
np.random.seed(42)
n = 1000
# Confounder: Age (affects both treatment and outcome)
age = np.random.uniform(25, 75, n)
# Treatment: Training program (more likely for younger people)
treatment_prob = 0.3 + 0.3 * (75 - age) / 50 # Inverse relationship with age
treatment = (np.random.uniform(0, 1, n) < treatment_prob).astype(int)
# Outcome: Salary (affected by both treatment and age)
# True causal effect of treatment: +$5000
salary = 40000 + 500 * age + 5000 * treatment + np.random.normal(0, 10000, n)
df = pd.DataFrame({
'age': age,
'treatment': treatment,
'salary': salary,
})
print("Observational Data Summary:")
print(df.describe())
print(f"\nTreatment Rate: {df['treatment'].mean():.1%}")
print(f"Average Salary (Control): ${df[df['treatment']==0]['salary'].mean():.0f}")
print(f"Average Salary (Treatment): ${df[df['treatment']==1]['salary'].mean():.0f}")
# 1. Naive Comparison (BIASED - ignores confounding)
naive_effect = df[df['treatment']==1]['salary'].mean() - df[df['treatment']==0]['salary'].mean()
print(f"\n1. Naive Comparison: ${naive_effect:.0f} (BIASED)")
# 2. Regression Adjustment (Covariate Adjustment)
X = df[['treatment', 'age']]
y = df['salary']
model = LinearRegression()
model.fit(X, y)
regression_effect = model.coef_[0]
print(f"\n2. Regression Adjustment: ${regression_effect:.0f}")
# 3. Propensity Score Matching
# Estimate probability of treatment given covariates
ps_model = LogisticRegression()
ps_model.fit(df[['age']], df['treatment'])
df['propensity_score'] = ps_model.predict_proba(df[['age']])[:, 1]
print(f"\n3. Propensity Score Matching:")
print(f"PS range: [{df['propensity_score'].min():.3f}, {df['propensity_score'].max():.3f}]")
# Matching: find control for each treated unit
matched_pairs = []
treated_units = df[df['treatment'] == 1].index
for treated_idx in treated_units:
treated_ps = df.loc[treated_idx, 'propensity_score']
treated_age = df.loc[treated_idx, 'age']
# Find closest control unit
control_units = df[(df['treatment'] == 0) &
(df['propensity_score'] >= treated_ps - 0.1) &
(df['propensity_score'] <= treated_ps + 0.1)].index
if len(control_units) > 0:
closest_control = min(control_units,
key=lambda x: abs(df.loc[x, 'propensity_score'] - treated_ps))
matched_pairs.append({
'treated_idx': treated_idx,
'control_idx': closest_control,
'treated_salary': df.loc[treated_idx, 'salary'],
'control_salary': df.loc[closest_control, 'salary'],
})
matched_df = pd.DataFrame(matched_pairs)
psm_effect = (matched_df['treated_salary'] - matched_df['control_salary']).mean()
print(f"PSM Effect: ${psm_effect:.0f}")
print(f"Matched pairs: {len(matched_df)}")
# 4. Stratification by Propensity Score
df['ps_stratum'] = pd.qcut(df['propensity_score'], q=5, labels=False, duplicates='drop')
stratified_effects = []
for stratum in df['ps_stratum'].unique():
stratum_data = df[df['ps_stratum'] == stratum]
if (stratum_data['treatment'] == 0).sum() > 0 and (stratum_data['treatment'] == 1).sum() > 0:
treated_mean = stratum_data[stratum_data['treatment'] == 1]['salary'].mean()
control_mean = stratum_data[stratum_data['treatment'] == 0]['salary'].mean()
effect = treated_mean - control_mean
stratified_effects.append(effect)
stratified_effect = np.mean(stratified_effects)
print(f"\n4. Stratification by PS: ${stratified_effect:.0f}")
# 5. Visualization
fig, axes = plt.subplots(2, 2, figsize=(14, 10))
# Treatment distribution by age
ax = axes[0, 0]
treated = df[df['treatment'] == 1]
control = df[df['treatment'] == 0]
ax.hist(control['age'], bins=20, alpha=0.6, label='Control', color='blue')
ax.hist(treated['age'], bins=20, alpha=0.6, label='Treated', color='red')
ax.set_xlabel('Age')
ax.set_ylabel('Frequency')
ax.set_title('Age Distribution by Treatment')
ax.legend()
ax.grid(True, alpha=0.3, axis='y')
# Salary vs Age (colored by treatment)
ax = axes[0, 1]
ax.scatter(control['age'], control['salary'], alpha=0.5, label='Control', s=30)
ax.scatter(treated['age'], treated['salary'], alpha=0.5, label='Treated', s=30, color='red')
ax.set_xlabel('Age')
ax.set_ylabel('Salary')
ax.set_title('Salary vs Age by Treatment')
ax.legend()
ax.grid(True, alpha=0.3)
# Propensity Score Distribution
ax = axes[1, 0]
ax.hist(df[df['treatment'] == 0]['propensity_score'], bins=20, alpha=0.6, label='Control', color='blue')
ax.hist(df[df['treatment'] == 1]['propensity_score'], bins=20, alpha=0.6, label='Treated', color='red')
ax.set_xlabel('Propensity Score')
ax.set_ylabel('Frequency')
ax.set_title('Propensity Score Distribution')
ax.legend()
ax.grid(True, alpha=0.3, axis='y')
# Treatment Effect Comparison
ax = axes[1, 1]
methods = ['Naive', 'Regression', 'PSM', 'Stratified']
effects = [naive_effect, regression_effect, psm_effect, stratified_effect]
true_effect = 5000
ax.bar(methods, effects, color=['red', 'orange', 'yellow', 'lightgreen'], alpha=0.7, edgecolor='black')
ax.axhline(y=true_effect, color='green', linestyle='--', linewidth=2, label=f'True Effect (${true_effect:.0f})')
ax.set_ylabel('Treatment Effect ($)')
ax.set_title('Treatment Effect Estimates by Method')
ax.legend()
ax.grid(True, alpha=0.3, axis='y')
for i, effect in enumerate(effects):
ax.text(i, effect + 200, f'${effect:.0f}', ha='center', va='bottom')
plt.tight_layout()
plt.show()
# 6. Doubly Robust Estimation
from sklearn.ensemble import RandomForestRegressor
# Propensity score model
ps_model_dr = LogisticRegression().fit(df[['age']], df['treatment'])
ps_scores = ps_model_dr.predict_proba(df[['age']])[:, 1]
# Outcome model
outcome_model = RandomForestRegressor(n_estimators=50, random_state=42)
outcome_model.fit(df[['treatment', 'age']], df['salary'])
# Doubly robust estimator
treated_mask = df['treatment'] == 1
control_mask = df['treatment'] == 0
# Adjust for propensity score
treated_adjusted = (treated_mask.astype(int) * df['salary']) / (ps_scores + 0.01)
control_adjusted = (control_mask.astype(int) * df['salary']) / (1 - ps_scores + 0.01)
# Outcome predictions
pred_treated = outcome_model.predict(df[['treatment', 'age']].replace({'treatment': 0, 1: 1}))
pred_control = outcome_model.predict(df[['treatment', 'age']].replace({'treatment': 1, 0: 0}))
dr_effect = treated_adjusted.sum() / treated_mask.sum() - control_adjusted.sum() / control_mask.sum()
print(f"\n6. Doubly Robust Estimation: ${dr_effect:.0f}")
# 7. Heterogeneous Treatment Effects
print(f"\n7. Heterogeneous Treatment Effects (by Age Quartile):")
for age_q in pd.qcut(df['age'], q=4, duplicates='drop').unique():
mask = (df['age'] >= age_q.left) & (df['age'] < age_q.right)
stratum_data = df[mask]
if (stratum_data['treatment'] == 0).sum() > 0 and (stratum_data['treatment'] == 1).sum() > 0:
treated_mean = stratum_data[stratum_data['treatment'] == 1]['salary'].mean()
control_mean = stratum_data[stratum_data['treatment'] == 0]['salary'].mean()
effect = treated_mean - control_mean
print(f" Age {age_q.left:.0f}-{age_q.right:.0f}: ${effect:.0f}")
# 8. Sensitivity Analysis
print(f"\n8. Sensitivity Analysis (Hidden Confounder Impact):")
# Vary hidden confounder correlation with outcome
for hidden_effect in [1000, 2000, 5000, 10000]:
adjusted_effect = regression_effect - hidden_effect * 0.1
print(f" If hidden confounder worth ${hidden_effect}: Effect = ${adjusted_effect:.0f}")
# 9. Summary Table
print(f"\n" + "="*60)
print("CAUSAL INFERENCE SUMMARY")
print("="*60)
print(f"True Treatment Effect: ${true_effect:,.0f}")
print(f"\nEstimates:")
print(f" Naive (BIASED): ${naive_effect:,.0f}")
print(f" Regression Adjustment: ${regression_effect:,.0f}")
print(f" Propensity Score Matching: ${psm_effect:,.0f}")
print(f" Stratification: ${stratified_effect:,.0f}")
print(f" Doubly Robust: ${dr_effect:,.0f}")
print("="*60)
# 10. Causal Graph (Text representation)
print(f"\n10. Causal Graph (DAG):")
print(f"""
Age → Treatment ← (Selection Bias)
↓ ↓
└─→ Salary
Interpretation:
- Age is a confounder
- Treatment causally affects Salary
- Age directly affects Salary
- Age affects probability of Treatment
""")
```
## Causal Assumptions
- **Unconfoundedness**: No unmeasured confounders
- **Overlap**: Common support on propensity scores
- **SUTVA**: No interference between units
- **Consistency**: Single version of treatment
## Treatment Effect Types
- **ATE**: Average Treatment Effect (overall)
- **ATT**: Average Treatment on Treated
- **CATE**: Conditional Average Treatment Effect
- **HTE**: Heterogeneous Treatment Effects
## Method Strengths
- **RCT**: Gold standard, controls all confounders
- **Matching**: Balances groups, preserves overlap
- **Regression**: Adjusts for covariates
- **Instrumental Variables**: Handles endogeneity
- **Causal Forests**: Learns heterogeneous effects
## Deliverables
- Causal graph visualization
- Treatment effect estimates
- Sensitivity analysis
- Heterogeneous treatment effects
- Covariate balance assessment
- Propensity score diagnostics
- Final causal inference report
This skill performs causal inference to identify cause-and-effect relationships and estimate treatment effects from observational data. It uses propensity scores, instrumental variables, causal graphs, and doubly robust methods to produce defensible estimates for policy and program evaluation. Results include effect estimates, diagnostics, and sensitivity checks to support decision-making.
The skill inspects observational datasets to identify treatments, outcomes, and confounders, then applies methods like propensity score matching, stratification, regression adjustment, instrumental variables, and causal forests. It generates propensity scores, balances covariates, estimates ATE/ATT/CATE, produces DAG-based causal graphs, and runs sensitivity analyses to quantify robustness to hidden confounding. Outputs include numeric estimates, diagnostic plots, and a concise interpretation for stakeholders.
What assumptions are required for valid causal estimates?
Key assumptions are unconfoundedness (no unmeasured confounders), overlap/common support for propensity scores, SUTVA (no interference), and consistency of treatment definition.
Which method should I use if treatment assignment is endogenous?
Use instrumental variables or natural experiments when a valid instrument exists; otherwise report bounds and sensitivity analyses and consider doubly robust estimators to mitigate model misspecification.