Completely randomized experiments have been the gold standard for drawing causal inference because they can balance all potential confounding on average. However, they can often suffer from unbalanced covariates for realized treatment assignments. Rerandomization, a design that rerandomizes the treatment assignment until a prespecified covariate balance criterion is met, has recently got attention due to its easy implementation, improved covariate balance and more efficient inference. Researchers have then suggested to use the assignments that minimize the covariate imbalance, namely the optimally balanced design. This has caused again the long-time controversy between two philosophies for designing experiments: randomization versus optimal and thus almost deterministic designs. Existing literature argued that rerandomization with overly balanced observed covariates can lead to highly imbalanced unobserved covariates, making it vulnerable to model misspecification. On the contrary, rerandomization with properly balanced covariates can provide robust inference for treatment effects while sacrificing some efficiency compared to the ideally optimal design. In this paper, we show it is possible that, by making the covariate imbalance diminishing at a proper rate as the sample size increases, rerandomization can achieve its ideally optimal precision that one can expect with perfectly balanced covariates while still maintaining its robustness. In particular, we provide the sufficient and necessary condition on the number of covariates for achieving the desired optimality. Our results rely on a more dedicated asymptotic analysis for rerandomization. The derived theory for rerandomization provides a deeper understanding of its large-sample property and can better guide its practical implementation. Furthermore, it also helps reconcile the controversy between randomized and optimal designs.
翻译:完全随机的实验是计算因果推断的黄金标准, 因为它们可以平均平衡所有潜在的折叠。 但是, 它们往往会因实现治疗任务时的不平衡共变差而受害。 重新随机化, 一种在事先指定共变差平衡标准达到之前重新重新调整治疗任务的设计, 最近因其容易实施而引起注意, 共变平衡和更有效的推论。 研究人员随后建议使用尽量减少共变不平衡的派任, 即最佳的更替平衡设计。 这再次引起了两个设计实验的哲学之间的长期争论: 随机化相对于最佳的, 因而几乎是确定性的设计。 现有文献认为, 过于均衡的共变差标准可以导致高度失衡的共变差, 使得它容易被模型误差。 相反, 以适当平衡的调和调和法进行再调和, 与理想的最佳设计相比, 降低某些效率。 在本文中,我们可能通过调整调和的正变差法, 使一个理想的精细的精细的精细的精细度, 使得我们更精确的精细的精细的精确度能够更精确地调整其精细的调, 。