Selective Randomization Inference for Interference

Empirical researchers often use tests for interference as pretests or robustness checks. However, when the results guide the choice of models, parameters, or hypotheses, the resulting data-dependent selection can compromise the validity of subsequent inference. This paper develops a two-stage selective randomization inference framework for interference that explicitly conditions on the selection event to account for data-dependent selection. We first test the null hypothesis of no treatment spillover using a conditional randomization method. If this null is rejected, we test the null hypothesis of zero exposure contrast under a pre-specified exposure mapping that allows for spillover effects; otherwise, we test the null hypothesis of no direct effects under the assumption of no spillover. We prove that each second-stage test controls the selective Type I error rate in finite samples and evaluate the size and power of the proposed tests through Monte Carlo experiments.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
arXiv (Cornell University)
Published
2026-11-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2611.02443
Primary Topic
Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Selective Randomization Inference for Interference

Takahide Yanagi
arXiv (Cornell University)
Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
preprint

Selective Randomization Inference for Interference

Takahide Yanagi
preprint en

Abstract

Empirical researchers often use tests for interference as pretests or robustness checks. However, when the results guide the choice of models, parameters, or hypotheses, the resulting data-dependent selection can compromise the validity of subsequent inference. This paper develops a two-stage selective randomization inference framework for interference that explicitly conditions on the selection event to account for data-dependent selection. We first test the null hypothesis of no treatment spillover using a conditional randomization method. If this null is rejected, we test the null hypothesis of zero exposure contrast under a pre-specified exposure mapping that allows for spillover effects; otherwise, we test the null hypothesis of no direct effects under the assumption of no spillover. We prove that each second-stage test controls the selective Type I error rate in finite samples and evaluate the size and power of the proposed tests through Monte Carlo experiments.

arXiv (Cornell University)
Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon