Jennifer Brennan
Jennifer Brennan works on experimental design in the Market Algorithms group of the Athena research team. She received her PhD in Computer Science from the University of Washington in 2022, advised by Kevin Jamieson, and her BS in Mathematics and Computer Science from Harvey Mudd College. Jennifer's research interests include experimental design for marketplaces and platforms, especially settings in which interactions between the arms of an experiment cause standard methods to fail.
Research Areas
Authored Publications
Sort By
Reducing Symbiosis Bias through Better A/B Tests of Recommendation Algorithms
Yahu Cong
Yiwei Yu
Lina Lin
Yajun Peng
Changping Meng
Ningren (Peter) Han
David Holtz
Proceedings of WWW'25 (2025)
Preview abstract
It is increasingly common in digital environments to use A/B tests to compare the performance of recommendation algorithms. However, such experiments often violate the stable unit treatment value assumption (SUTVA), particularly SUTVA's ''no hidden treatments'' assumption, due to the shared data between algorithms being compared. This results in a novel form of bias, which we term ''symbiosis bias,'' where the performance of each algorithm is influenced by the training data generated by its competitor. In this paper, we investigate three experimental designs--cluster-randomized, data-diverted, and user-corpus co-diverted experiments--aimed at mitigating symbiosis bias. We present a theoretical model of symbiosis bias and simulate the impact of each design in dynamic recommendation environments. Our results show that while each design reduces symbiosis bias to some extent, they also introduce new challenges, such as reduced training data in data-diverted experiments. We further validate the existence of symbiosis bias using data from a large-scale A/B test conducted on a global recommender system, demonstrating that symbiosis bias affects treatment effect estimates in the field. Our findings provide actionable insights for researchers and practitioners seeking to design experiments that accurately capture algorithmic performance without bias in treatment effect estimates introduced by shared data.
View details
Integer Programming for Generalized Causal Bootstrap Designs
Adel Javanmard
Nick Doudchenko
Proceedings of the 42 nd International Conference on Machine Learning (2025)
Preview abstract
In experimental causal inference, we distinguish between two sources of uncertainty: design uncertainty, due to the treatment assignment mechanism, and sampling uncertainty, when the sample is drawn from a super-population. This distinction matters in settings with small fixed samples and heterogeneous treatment effects, as in geographical experiments. The standard bootstrap procedure most often used by practitioners primarily estimates sampling uncertainty, and the causal bootstrap procedure, which accounts for design uncertainty, was developed for the completely randomized design and the difference-in-means estimator, whereas non-standard designs and estimators are often used in these low-power regimes. We address this gap by proposing an integer program which computes numerically the worst-case copula used as an input to the causal bootstrap method, in a wide range of settings. Specifically, we prove the asymptotic validity of our approach for unconfounded, conditionally unconfounded,
and individualistic with bounded confoundedness assignments, as well as generalizing to any linear-in-treatment and quadratic-in-treatment estimators. We demonstrate the refined confidence intervals achieved through simulations of small geographical experiments.
View details
Preview abstract
The conclusions of randomized controlled trials may be biased when the outcome of one unit depends on the treatment status of other units, a problem known as interference. In this work, we study interference in the setting of one-sided bipartite experiments in which the experimental units---where treatments are randomized and outcomes are measured---do not interact directly. Instead, their interactions are mediated through their connections to interference units on the other side of the graph. Examples of this type of interference are common in marketplaces and two-sided platforms. The cluster-randomized design is a popular method to mitigate interference when the graph is known, but it has not been well-studied in the one-sided bipartite experiment setting. In this work, we formalize a natural model for interference in one-sided bipartite experiments using the exposure mapping framework. We first exhibit settings under which existing cluster-randomized designs fail to properly mitigate interference under this model. We then show that minimizing the bias of the difference-in-means estimator under our model results in a balanced partitioning clustering objective with a natural interpretation. We further prove that our design is minimax optimal over the class of linear potential outcomes models with bounded interference. We conclude by providing theoretical and experimental evidence of the robustness of our design to a variety of interference graphs and potential outcomes models.
View details
Preview abstract
The conclusions of randomized controlled trials may be biased when the outcome of one unit depends on the treatment status of other units, a problem known as interference. In this work, we study interference in the setting of one-sided bipartite experiments in which the experimental units---where treatments are randomized and outcomes are measured---do not interact directly. Instead, their interactions are mediated through their connections to interference units on the other side of the graph. Examples of this type of interference are common in marketplaces and two-sided platforms. The cluster-randomized design is a popular method to mitigate interference when the graph is known, but it has not been well-studied in the one-sided bipartite experiment setting. In this work, we formalize a natural model for interference in one-sided bipartite experiments using the exposure mapping framework. We first exhibit settings under which existing cluster-randomized designs fail to properly mitigate interference under this model. We then show that minimizing the bias of the difference-in-means estimator under our model results in a balanced partitioning clustering objective with a natural interpretation. We further prove that our design is minimax optimal over the class of linear potential outcomes models with bounded interference. We conclude by providing theoretical and experimental evidence of the robustness of our design to a variety of interference graphs and potential outcomes models.
View details
