Comments and Controversies: Graphical models, potential outcomes and causal inference: Comment on Lindquist and Sobel
Year: 2011
Type: article
Abstract: Submitted to NeuroImage. TECHNICAL REPORT R-380 March 2011 Comments and Controversies: Graphical models, potential outcomes and causal inference: Comment on Lindquist and Sobel Judea Pearl University of California, Los Angeles Computer Science Department Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1596, USA [email protected] March 24, 2011 Dear Editor, I read with interest the comment by Lindquist and Sobel (LS Galles and Pearl, 1998; Halpern, 1998; Pearl, 2000, Ch.7) that the two notational systems are logically equiv- alent in the sense that a theorem in one is a theorem in the other, and an assumption in one has a parallel interpretation in the other. The translation between the two is given by two simple rules (Pearl, 2000, p. 101) that rewrite assumptions conveyed in graphical form into symbolic counterfactual nota- tion. In particular, assumptions A1–A4(b) that L&S present in their paper are faithfully represented by the causal chain Z → X → Y which they aim to replace or supplement.
Author: Judea Pearl
Language: English
Subfield: Artificial Intelligence
Field: Computer Science
Domain: Physical Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W318067727