Information systems researchers increasingly rely on quasi‑experimental methods such as difference‑in‑differences and instrumental variables to infer causal effects from observational panel data. A large Monte Carlo study of 9,837 parameter settings (≈9.8 million simulated datasets) shows that the gap between planned and achieved power is largely driven by serial correlation, panel attrition, staggered adoption bias, and parallel‑trend pre‑testing—factors that no closed‑form power calculator can fully capture. For IV designs, increasing sample size does not improve power or reduce exclusion bias unless instrument strength is enhanced, underscoring that identification hinges on the instrument rather than on larger N.
By Spandan Ghose Chowdhury
arXiv:2609.07944v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Existing causal-inference benchmarks for LLMs mostly score method descriptions or whether generated code runs, not whether the executed workflow recove...
By Yonghong Zhang, Ricardo Correia, Isabel M. Parra, Yong Xie
arXiv:2511. 03877v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Social and collaborative platforms emit multivariate time-series traces in which early interactions -- such as views, likes, or downloads -- are followed, sometimes months or years later, by higher impact like citations, sales, or reviews.
By Kimia Kazemian (Department of Computer Science, Cornell University), Zhenzhen Liu (Department of Computer Science, Cornell University), Yangfanyu Yang (Department of Information Science, Cornell University), Katie Luo (Department of Computer Science, Stanford University), Shuhan Gu (Department of Computer Science, Cornell University), Audrey Du (Department of Computer Science, Cornell University), Xinyu Yang (Department of Information Science, Cornell University), Jack Jansons (Department of Computer Science, Cornell University), Kilian Q. Weinberger (Department of Computer Science, Cornell University), John Thickstun (Department of Computer Science, Cornell University), Yian Yin (Department of Information Science, Cornell University), Sarah Dean (Department of Computer Science, Cornell University)
arXiv:2608. 20290v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Whether a language model has improved itself is increasingly judged not by mean accuracy but by which individual problems it gains and loses.
By Cheng Xu, Nan Yan, Liming Chen, M-Tahar Kechadi