Confounding equivalence in causal inference

Proceedings of the 26th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, UAI 2010

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 433-441

  Pearl, Judea ^a   Paz, Azaria ^b  

^a University of California   (United States)

^b TECHNION ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BACK DOORS; CAUSAL DIAGRAM; CAUSAL INFERENCES; COVARIATES; MANIPULATED VARIABLES; MARKOV BOUNDARY; MODEL TESTING; SIMPLE TESTS;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

EID: 79952434778     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (22)

1. Dawid, A. (2002). Influence diagrams for causal modelling and inference. International Statistical Review 70 161-189
2. Engle, R., Hendry, D. and Richard, J. (1983). Exogeneity. Econometrica 51 277-304
3. Glymour, M. and Greenland, S. (2008). Causal diagrams. In Modern Epidemiology (K. Rothman, S. Greenland and T. Lash, eds.), 3rd ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA, 183-209
4. Greenland, S., Pearl, J. and Robins, J. (1999). Causal diagrams for epidemiologic research. Epidemiology 10 37-48 (Pubitemid 29014427)
5. Greenland, S. and Robins, J. (1986). Identifiability, exchangeability, and epidemiological confounding. International Journal of Epidemiology 15 413-419 (Pubitemid 17171893)
6. Lauritzen, S. (2001). Causal inference from graphical models. In Complex Stochastic Systems (D. Cox and C. Kluppelberg, eds.). Chapman and Hall/CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 63-107
7. Lauritzen, S. L., Dawid, A. P., Larsen, B. N. and Leimer, H. G. (1990). Independence properties of directed Markov fields. Networks 20 491-505
8. Neyman, J. (1923). On the application of probability theory to agricultural experiments. Essay on principles. Section 9. Statistical Science 5 465-480
9. Pearl, J. (1988). Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA
10. Pearl, J. (1993). Comment: Graphical models, causality, and intervention. Statistical Science 8 266-269
11. Pearl, J. (1995). Causal diagrams for empirical research. Biometrika 82 669-710
12. Pearl, J. (1998). Why there is no statistical test for confounding, why many think there is, and why they are almost right. Tech. Rep. R-256, Department of Computer Science, University of California, Los Angeles, CA.〈http://ftp.cs.ucla.edu/pub/statser/R256.pdf〉
13. Pearl, J. (2000). Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference. Cambridge University Press, New York. 2nd edition, 2009
14. Pearl, J. (2009a). Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, New York
15. Pearl, J. (2009b). On a class of bias-amplifying variables that endanger effect estimates. Tech. Rep. R-356, Department of Computer Science, University of California, Los Angeles, CA. 〈http://ftp.cs.ucla.edu/pub/statser/r356. pdf〉. Forthcoming, Proceedings of UAI, 2010
16. Robins, J. (1997). Causal inference from complex longitudinal data. In Latent Variable Modeling and Applications to Causality (M. Berkane, ed.). SpringerVerlag, New York, 69-117
17. Rosenbaum, P. and Rubin, D. (1983). The central role of propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70 41-55
18. Rubin, D. (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology 66 688-701
19. Spirtes, P., Glymour, C. and Scheines, R. (2000). Causation, Prediction, and Search. 2nd ed. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
20. Stone, R. (1993). The assumptions on which causal inferences rest. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 55 455-466
21. Tian, J., Paz, A. and Pearl, J. (1998). Finding minimal separating sets. Tech. Rep. R-254, Computer Science Department, University of California, Los Angeles, CA. 〈http://ftp.cs.ucla.edu/pub/statser/r254.pdf〉
22. Wooldridge, J. (2009). Should instrumental variables be used as matching variables? Tech. rep., Michigan State University, MI. 〈https://www.msu.edu/ -ec/faculty/wooldridge/current%20research/treat1r6.pdf〉