On nearly assumption-free tests of nominal confidence interval coverage
  for causal parameters estimated by machine learning
  For many causal effect parameters of interest, doubly robust machine learning
(DRML) estimators $\hat{\psi}_{1}$ are the state-of-the-art, incorporating the
good prediction performance of machine learning; the decreased bias of doubly
robust estimators; and the analytic tractability and bias reduction of sample
splitting with cross fitting. Nonetheless, even in the absence of confounding
by unmeasured factors, the nominal $(1 - \alpha)$ Wald confidence interval
$\hat{\psi}_{1} \pm z_{\alpha / 2} \widehat{\mathsf{se}} [\hat{\psi}_{1}]$ may
still undercover even in large samples, because the bias of $\hat{\psi}_{1}$
may be of the same or even larger order than its standard error of order
$n^{-1/2}$.
  In this paper, we introduce essentially assumption-free tests that (i) can
falsify the null hypothesis that the bias of $\hat{\psi}_{1}$ is of smaller
order than its standard error, (ii) can provide an upper confidence bound on
the true coverage of the Wald interval, and (iii) are valid under the null
under no smoothness/sparsity assumptions on the nuisance parameters. The tests,
which we refer to as \underline{A}ssumption \underline{F}ree
\underline{E}mpirical \underline{C}overage \underline{T}ests (AFECTs), are
based on a U-statistic that estimates part of the bias of $\hat{\psi}_{1}$.
