In marketing, optimizing subsidy allocation to maximize overall profits is of substantial economic importance. Prior research has employed treatment effect estimation techniques to identify subsidy-sensitive items and design corresponding allocation strategies. However, more accurate treatment effect estimations do not necessarily lead to better allocations, underscoring the critical influence of decision boundaries in decision-making. This paper argues that optimal allocation fundamentally depends on predicting the expected optimal subsidy, a challenge distinct from conventional treatment effect estimation or causal decision-making, which existing approaches fail to address. To fill this gap, we introduce a two-stage Counterfactual optimal subsidy Learning method with an Asymmetric reward (CoLA). In the first stage, we derive a coarse estimate of the expected subsidy threshold by exploiting order information and the conditional independence between expected and observed subsidies. In the second stage, we refine these estimates using an asymmetric loss function, leading to more robust predictions. Under practical budget constraints, we prioritize candidates based on their Sharpe ratios to determine the final subsidy allocation strategy. Experiments on three public datasets and an online A/B test show that our method achieves significant performance improvements, yielding the highest total profit and incremental leverage ratios.

Post-click conversion rate (CVR) prediction is a central task in recommender systems, yet selection bias creates a severe distributional gap between the clicked training samples and the entire inference space. To address selection bias, propensity-based methods such as inverse propensity scoring (IPS) and doubly robust (DR) have been adopted, which aim to estimate the unbiased learning objective from biased training samples. However, these approaches assume strictly positive propensities, implying every user-item pair has a nonzero probability of interaction. In practice, such positivity assumption maybe violated, for example, in food-delivery platforms, some restaurants located more than 10 kilometers away will be blocked for recommendation. In this study, we theoretically show that when such zero-propensity samples, termed extrapolation samples exist, both IPS and DR estimators become biased. To overcome this limitation, we propose ExtraDebias method, which enables debiased recommendation in both non-extrapolation and extrapolation samples. Specifically, we first train a propensity model to identify extrapolation samples with extremely small propensity estimates, then estimate their pseudo-label intervals, and derive an upper bound of the learning objective for extrapolation samples. By minimizing the derived upper bound, debiased learning on extrapolation samples is ensured, while unbiased learning on non-extrapolation samples is achieved by standard IPS. Experiments on four real-world offline datasets and one online A/B test show that ExtraDebias effectively minimizes prediction errors on extrapolation samples and achieves optimal performance.

The significant success of graph learning has provoked a meaningful but challenging task of extracting the precise causal subgraphs that can interpret and improve the predictions. Unfortunately, current works merely center on partially eliminating either the spurious or the noisy parts, while overlook the fact that in more practical and general situations, both the spurious and noisy subgraph coexist with the causal one. This brings great challenges and makes previous methods fail to extract the true causal substructure. Unlike existing studies, in this paper, we propose a more reasonable problem formulation that hypothesizes the graph is a mixture of causal, spurious, and noisy subgraphs. With this regard, an Information Bottleneck-constrained denoised Causal Subgraph (IBCS) learning model is developed, which is capable of simultaneously excluding the spurious and noisy parts. Specifically, for the spurious correlation, we design a novel causal learning objective, in which beyond minimizing the empirical risks of causal and spurious subgraph classification, the intervention is further conducted on spurious features to cut off its correlation with the causal part. On this basis, we further impose the information bottleneck constraint to filter out label-irrelevant noise information. Theoretically, we prove that the causal subgraph extracted by our IBCS can approximate the ground-truth. Empirically, extensive evaluations on nine benchmark datasets demonstrate our superiority over state-of-the-art baselines.

Collaborative filtering builds personalized models from the collected user feedback. However, the collected data is observational rather than experimental, leading to various biases in the data, which can significantly affect the learned model. To address this issue, many studies have focused on propensity-based methods to combat the selection bias by reweighting the sample loss, and demonstrate that balancing is important for debiasing both theoretically and empirically. However, there are two questions that still need to be addressed: which function class should be balanced and how to effectively balance that function class? In this paper, we first perform theoretical analysis to show the effect of balancing finite-dimensional function classes on the bias of IPS and DR methods, and based on this, we propose a universal kernel-based balancing method to balance functions on the reproducing kernel Hilbert space. In addition, we propose a novel adaptive causal balancing method during the alternating update between unbiased evaluation and training of the prediction model. Specifically, the prediction loss of the model is projected in the kernel-based covariate function space, and the projection coefficients are used to determine which functions should be prioritized for balancing to reduce the estimation bias. We conduct extensive experiments on three real-world datasets to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

The collected data in recommender systems generally suffers selection bias. Considerable works are proposed to address selection bias induced by observed user and item features, but they fail when hidden features (e.g., user age or salary) that affect both user selection mechanism and feedback exist, which is called hidden confounding. To tackle this issue, methods based on sensitivity analysis and leveraging a few randomized controlled trial (RCT) data for model calibration are proposed. However, the former relies on strong assumptions of hidden confounding strength, whereas the latter relies on the expensive RCT data, thereby limiting their applicability in real-world scenarios. In this paper, we propose to employ heterogeneous observational data to address hidden confounding, wherein some data is subject to hidden confounding while the remaining is not. We argue that such setup is more aligned with practical scenarios, especially when some users do not have complete personal information (thus assumed with hidden confounding), while others do have (thus assumed without hidden confounding). To achieve unbiased learning, we propose a novel meta-learning based debiasing method called MetaDebias. This method explicitly models oracle error imputation and hidden confounding bias, and utilizes bi-level optimization for model training. Extensive experiments on three public datasets validate our method achieves state-of-the-art performance in the presence of hidden confounding, regardless of RCT data availability.

Propensity-based weighting methods have been widely studied and demonstrated competitive performance in debiased recommendations. Nevertheless, there are still many questions to be addressed. How to estimate the propensity more conducive to debiasing performance? Which metric is more reasonable to measure the quality of the learned propensities? Is it better to make the cross-entropy loss as small as possible when learning propensities? In this paper, we first discuss the potential problems of the previously widely adopted metrics for learned propensities, and propose balanced-mean-squared-error (BMSE) metric for debiased recommendations. Based on BMSE, we propose IPS-V2 and DR-V2 as the estimators of unbiased loss, and theoretically show that IPS-V2 and DR-V2 have greater propensity balancing and smaller variance without sacrificing additional bias. We further propose a co-training method for learning balanced representation and unbiased prediction. Extensive experiments are conducted on three real-world datasets including a large industrial dataset, and the results show that our approach boosts the balancing property and results in enhanced debiasing performance.

In recommender systems, the collected data used for training is always subject to selection bias, which poses a great challenge for unbiased learning. Previous studies proposed various debiasing methods based on observed user and item features, but ignored the effect of hidden confounding. To address this problem, recent works suggest the use of sensitivity analysis for worst-case control of the unknown true propensity, but only valid when the true propensity is near to the nominal propensity within a finite bound. In this paper, we first perform theoretical analysis to reveal the possible failure of previous approaches, including propensity-based, multi-task learning, and bi-level optimization methods, in achieving unbiased learning when hidden confounding is present. Then, we propose a unified multi-task learning approach to remove hidden confounding, which uses a few unbiased ratings to calibrate the learned nominal propensities and nominal error imputations from biased data. We conduct extensive experiments on three publicly available benchmark datasets containing a fully exposed large-scale industrial dataset, validating the effectiveness of the proposed methods in removing hidden confounding.

Recommender systems are seen as an effective tool to address information overload, but it is widely known that the presence of various biases makes direct training on large-scale observational data result in sub-optimal prediction performance. In contrast, unbiased ratings obtained from randomized controlled trials or A/B tests are considered to be the golden standard, but are costly and small in scale in reality. To exploit both types of data, recent works proposed to use unbiased ratings to correct the parameters of the propensity or imputation models trained on the biased dataset. However, the existing methods fail to obtain accurate predictions in the presence of unobserved confounding or model misspecification. In this paper, we propose a theoretically guaranteed model-agnostic balancing approach that can be applied to any existing debiasing method with the aim of combating unobserved confounding and model misspecification. The proposed approach makes full use of unbiased data by alternatively correcting model parameters learned with biased data, and adaptively learning balance coefficients of biased samples for further debiasing. Extensive real-world experiments are conducted along with the deployment of our proposal on four representative debiasing methods to demonstrate the effectiveness.