An empirical study of one of the simplest causal prediction algorithms

CEUR Workshop Proceedings

Volumn 1504, Issue , 2015, Pages 30-39

  Mooij, Joris M ^a   Cremers, Jerome ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; FORECASTING;

CONDITIONAL INDEPENDENCES; CONSTRAINT-BASED; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; LATENT VARIABLE; OBSERVATIONAL DATA; PREDICTION ACCURACY; PREDICTION ALGORITHMS;

ALGORITHMS;

EID: 84961332977     PISSN: 16130073     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (25)

1. J. Pearl. Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
2. P. Spirtes, C. Glymour, and R. Scheines. Causation, Prediction, and Search. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2nd edition, 2000.
3. J. Tian and J. Pearl. A general identification condition for causal effects. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, page 567573. AAAI Press, 2002.
4. I. Shpitser and J. Pearl. Identification of joint interventional distributions in recursive semi-Markovian causal models. In Proceedings of the Twenty-First National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1219-1226. AAAI Press, 2006.
5. Y. Huang and M. Valtorta. Identifiability in causal bayesian networks: a sound and complete algorithm. In Proceedings of the Twenty-First National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1149-1154. AAAI Press, 2006.
6. J. Zhang. Causal reasoning with ancestral graphs. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 9:1437-1474, 2008.
7. M. H. Maathuis, D. Colombo, M. Kalisch, and P. Bühlmann. Predicting causal effects in largescale systems from observational data. Nature Methods, 7:247-248, 2010.
8. M. H. Maathuis and D. Colombo. A generalized backdoor criterion. Annals of Statistics, pages 1060-1088, 2015.
9. A. Hyttinen, F. Eberhardt, and M. Järvisalo. Do-calculus when the true graph is unknown. In Proceedings of the 31th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 2015.
10. T. J. Vander Weele and I. Shpitser. A new criterion for confounder selection. Biometrics, 67:1406-1413, 2011.
11. Doris Entner, Patrik O. Hoyer, and Peter Spirtes. Datadriven covariate selection for nonparametric estimation of causal effects. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (AISTATS 2013), volume 31 of Journal of Machine Learning Research Workshop and Conference Proceedings, 2013.
12. Subramani Mani, Peter Spirtes, and Gregory F. Cooper. A theoretical study of Y structures for causal discovery. In Proceedings of the Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pages 314-323. AUAI Press, 2006.
13. Tom Claassen and Tom Heskes. A logical characterization of constraint-based causal discovery. In Proceedings of the 27th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI 2011), pages 135-144, 2011.
14. G. F. Cooper. A simple constraint-based algorithm for efficiently mining observational databases for causal relationships. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 1:203-224, 1997.
15. T. Richardson and P. Spirtes. Ancestral graph Markov models. Ann. Stat., 30(4):962-1030, 2002.
16. S Mani and G F Cooper. Causal discovery using a bayesian local causal discovery algorithm. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 107:731-735, 2004.
17. Subramani Mani. A Bayesian Local Causal Discovery Framework. PhD thesis, University of Pittsburg, March 2006. URL http://d-scholarship. pitt.edu/10181/.
18. J. M. Robins, R. Scheines, P. Spirtes, and L. Wasserman. Uniform consistency in causal inference. Biometrika, 90:491-515, 2003.
19. Nicholas Cornia and Joris M. Mooij. Type-II errors of independence tests can lead to arbitrarily large errors in estimated causal effects: An illustrative example. In Joris M. Mooij, Dominik Janzing, Jonas Peters, Tom Claassen, and Antti Hyttinen, editors, UAI 2014 Workshop Causal Inference: Learning and Prediction, number 1274 in CEUR Workshop Proceedings, pages 35-42, Aachen, 2014. URL http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1274/uai2014ci-paper7.pdf.
20. Ross D. Shachter. Bayes-ball: Rational pastime (for determining irrelevance and requisite information in belief networks and influence diagrams). In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Articifial Intelligence, pages 480-487. AUAI Press, 1998.
21. Jan Lemeire and Dominik Janzing. Replacing causal faithfulness with algorithmic independence of conditionals. Minds and Machines, 23(2):227-249, 2013.
22. C. Uhler, G. Raskutti, P. Bühlmann, and B. Yu. Geometry of the faithfulness assumption in causal inference. The Annals of Statistics, 41:436-463, 2013.
23. J. Zhang and P. Spirtes. Strong faithfulness and uniform consistency in causal inference. In Proceedings of the 19th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pages 632-639. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 2003.
24. Ioannis Tsamardinos, Sofia Triantafillou, and Vincenzo Lagani. Towards integrative causal analysis of heterogeneous data sets and studies. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 13:1097-1157, April 2012.
25. J. Zhang and P. Spirtes. Detection of unfaithfulness and robust causal inference. Minds and Machines, 18:239-271, 2008.