. Suppose the table below shows the potential outcomes. FA and Y3, given receipt of treatment A {placebo} and 3 (active experimental treatment] for 1|] subjects enrolled in a randomized trial. Imagine further that non-adherence to placebo yields the same response as adherence to placebo [nc \"placebo Ina-Jilect")1 and that non-adherence to the active treatment, is equivalent to placebo. Subjects are randomly assigned treatment according to the fourth column. The fth column indicates which subjects are adherent to assigned treatment [Y=Ye3. N=No]|. The last (empty) column is the response that would be cbserved given assigned treatment and adherence. Assigned Subject YA Y3 Treatment Adhere? Y 1 13 13 A. Y 2 14 14 A. N 3 4 14 B Y 4 2 13 A. Y 5 T 2|] B Y E 1 l. 1 1 B N T 4 4 B N 3 1|] 1'] A. N 9 4 4 B Y 10 l. T A. Y {a} {Epts'j What is the population average causal effect of receipt of treatment B relative to receipt of treatment A in this population? {b} {5pts] Fill in the last column of observed rmponses given treatment assignments and adherence. {You can just provide this as a list with values and subject numbers rather than reproducing the entire table.) (c) {5pts] Find the ITT estimate of the causal eect cf treatment. {d} {Eptsj Suppose that all subjects had been adherent. Find the timate of the causal eect of full-adherence to E versus full-adherence to A. (e) {lpts} {At least for placebo controlled trials} the ITT analysis is generally considered \"conservative" in that it underestimat the full adherence treatment effect. Is that true in this case? Why or why not