<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Causal Inference on Boyang Yue</title><link>http://blog.boyangyue.com/tags/causal-inference/</link><description>Recent content in Causal Inference on Boyang Yue</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><copyright>A Good Year Ahead</copyright><lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Aug 2023 15:30:00 +0800</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="http://blog.boyangyue.com/tags/causal-inference/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Why Experiment Wins Underdeliver</title><link>http://blog.boyangyue.com/2023/08/why-experiment-wins-underdeliver/</link><pubDate>Sun, 06 Aug 2023 15:30:00 +0800</pubDate><guid>http://blog.boyangyue.com/2023/08/why-experiment-wins-underdeliver/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;A product team ships ten experiment wins in a quarter. Each one cleared the decision rule, each showed a lift on its primary metric, and no single analysis looked obviously broken. Then the quarter closes and the top-line number barely moves. That disappointment is common enough that it deserves a name.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;An A/B test is one of the few instruments a product team has that can yield genuinely causal evidence. Random assignment, not the &lt;span class="katex"&gt;&lt;math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"&gt;&lt;semantics&gt;&lt;mrow&gt;&lt;mi&gt;p&lt;/mi&gt;&lt;/mrow&gt;&lt;annotation encoding="application/x-tex"&gt;p&lt;/annotation&gt;&lt;/semantics&gt;&lt;/math&gt;&lt;/span&gt;-value, gives the comparison its causal interpretation: this change, on average, moved this metric for the users represented by the analysis. Statistical significance says that, if the null model and test assumptions held, a difference this large or larger would be rare. That is why experiments are so valuable, and why the quarter&amp;rsquo;s disappointment usually traces to their limits rather than to the method itself.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>