Confounding-Robust Policy Improvement
  We study the problem of learning personalized decision policies from
observational data while accounting for possible unobserved confounding.
Previous approaches, which assume unconfoundedness, i.e., that no unobserved
confounders affect both the treatment assignment as well as outcome, can lead
to policies that introduce harm rather than benefit when some unobserved
confounding is present, as is generally the case with observational data.
Instead, since policy value and regret may not be point-identifiable, we study
a method that minimizes the worst-case estimated regret of a candidate policy
against a baseline policy over an uncertainty set for propensity weights that
controls the extent of unobserved confounding. We prove generalization
guarantees that ensure our policy will be safe when applied in practice and
will in fact obtain the best-possible uniform control on the range of all
possible population regrets that agree with the possible extent of confounding.
We develop efficient algorithmic solutions to compute this confounding-robust
policy. Finally, we assess and compare our methods on synthetic and
semi-synthetic data. In particular, we consider a case study on personalizing
hormone replacement therapy based on observational data, where we validate our
results on a randomized experiment. We demonstrate that hidden confounding can
hinder existing policy learning approaches and lead to unwarranted harm, while
our robust approach guarantees safety and focuses on well-evidenced
improvement, a necessity for making personalized treatment policies learned
from observational data reliable in practice.
