The extent to which an individual or chance can influence the outcome of a game is a central question in the analysis of games. Consequently, the ability to characterize sources of variation in game outcomes may have significant implications in areas such as game design, law, and multi-agent reinforcement learning. We derive a closed-form expression and estimators for the variance in the outcome of a general multi-agent game that is attributable to a player or chance. We analyze poker hands to show that randomness in the cards dealt has surprisingly little influence on the outcomes of each hand. A simple example is given that demonstrates how variance decompositions can be used to measure other interesting properties of games.

There is tremendous interest in precision medicine as a means to improve patient outcomes by tailoring treatment to individual characteristics. An individualized treatment rule formalizes precision medicine as a map from patient information to a recommended treatment. A treatment rule is defined to be optimal if it maximizes the mean of a scalar outcome in a population of interest, e.g., symptom reduction. However, clinical and intervention scientists often seek to balance multiple and possibly competing outcomes, e.g., symptom reduction and the risk of an adverse event. One approach to precision medicine in this setting is to elicit a composite outcome which balances all competing outcomes; unfortunately, eliciting a composite outcome directly from patients is difficult without a high-quality instrument, and an expert-derived composite outcome may not account for heterogeneity in patient preferences. We propose a new paradigm for the study of precision medicine using observational data that relies solely on the assumption that clinicians are approximately (i.e., imperfectly) making decisions to maximize individual patient utility. Estimated composite outcomes are subsequently used to construct an estimator of an individualized treatment rule which maximizes the mean of patient-specific composite outcomes. The estimated composite outcomes and estimated optimal individualized treatment rule provide new insights into patient preference heterogeneity, clinician behavior, and the value of precision medicine in a given domain. We derive inference procedures for the proposed estimators under mild conditions and demonstrate their finite sample performance through a suite of simulation experiments and an illustrative application to data from a study of bipolar depression.

Individualized treatment rules aim to identify if, when, which, and to whom treatment should be applied. A globally aging population, rising healthcare costs, and increased access to patient-level data have created an urgent need for high-quality estimators of individualized treatment rules that can be applied to observational data. A recent and promising line of research for estimating individualized treatment rules recasts the problem of estimating an optimal treatment rule as a weighted classification problem. We consider a class of estimators for optimal treatment rules that are analogous to convex large-margin classifiers. The proposed class applies to observational data and is doubly-robust in the sense that correct specification of either a propensity or outcome model leads to consistent estimation of the optimal individualized treatment rule. Using techniques from semiparametric efficiency theory, we derive rates of convergence for the proposed estimators and use these rates to characterize the bias-variance trade-off for estimating individualized treatment rules with classification-based methods. Simulation experiments informed by these results demonstrate that it is possible to construct new estimators within the proposed framework that significantly outperform existing ones. We illustrate the proposed methods using data from a labor training program and a study of inflammatory bowel syndrome.

We present new methodology based on Multi-Objective Markov Decision Processes for developing sequential decision support systems from data. Our approach uses sequential decision-making data to provide support that is useful to many different decision-makers, each with different, potentially time-varying preference. To accomplish this, we develop an extension of fitted-$Q$ iteration for multiple objectives that computes policies for all scalarization functions, i.e. preference functions, simultaneously from continuous-state, finite-horizon data. We identify and address several conceptual and computational challenges along the way, and we introduce a new solution concept that is appropriate when different actions have similar expected outcomes. Finally, we demonstrate an application of our method using data from the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness and show that our approach offers decision-makers increased choice by a larger class of optimal policies.