Learning from Data pp 23-33 | Cite as

# A Causal Calculus for Statistical Research

Chapter

## Abstract

A calculus is proposed that admits two conditioning operators: ordinary Bayes conditioning,
Starting with nonparametric specification of structural equations, the paper establishes the semantics necessary for a theory of interventions, presents the three rules of inference, and proposes an operational definition of structural equations.

*P*(*y|X*=*x*), and causal conditioning,*P*(*y*|*set*(*X*=*x*)), that is, conditioning*P*(*y*) on holding*X*constant (at*x*) by external intervention. This distinction, which will be supported by three rules of inference, will permit us to derive probability expressions for the combined effect of observations and interventions. The resulting calculus yields simple solutions to a number of interesting problems in causal inference and should allow rank-and-file researchers to tackle practical problems that are generally considered too hard, or impossible. Examples are:- 1.
Deciding whether the information available in a given observational study is sufficient for obtaining consistent estimates of causal effects.

- 2.
Deriving algebraic expressions for causal effect estimands.

- 3.
Selecting measurements that would render randomized experiments unnecessary.

- 4.
Selecting a set of indirect (randomized) experiments to replace direct experiments that are either infeasible or too expensive.

- 5.
Predicting (or bounding) the efficacy of treatments from randomized trials with imperfect compliance.

## Keywords

Causal Effect Causal Theory Manipulate Variable Causal Information Causal Diagram
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- [Balke & Pearl, 1994a]Balke, A. and Pearl, J., “Probabilistic evaluation of counterfactual queries,” in
*Proceedings of the Twelfth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-94)*, Seattle, WA, Volume I, 230–237, July 31 - August 4, 1994.Google Scholar - [Cox, 1992]Cox, D.R.,“Some statistical aspects,”
*Journal of the Royal Statistical Society*, Series A, 155, 291–301, 1992.zbMATHGoogle Scholar - [Cox & Wermuth, 1993]Cox, D.R. and Wermuth, N., “Linear dependencies represented by chain graphs,”
*Statistical Society*, 8, 204–218, 1993MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Fisher, 1970]Fisher, F.M., “A correspondence principle for simultaneous equation models,”
*Econometrica*, 38, 73–92, 1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Freedman, 1987]Freedman, D., “As others see us: A case study in path analysis” (with discussion),
*Journal of Educational Statistics*, 12, 101–223, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Galles & Pearl, 1995]Galles, D. and Pearl, J., “Testing Identifiability of Causal Effects,” in P. Besnard and S. Hanks (Eds.),
*Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence 11*, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 185–195, 1995.Google Scholar - [Goldszmidt & Pearl, 1992]Goldszmidt, M. and Pearl, J., “Rank-based systems: A simple approach to belief revision, belief update, and reasoning about evidence and actions,” in B. Nebel, C. Rich, and W. Swartout (Eds.),
*Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning*, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 661–672, October 1992.Google Scholar - [Pearl, 1988]Pearl, J.,
*Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligence Systems*, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1988.Google Scholar - [Pearl, 1993a]Pearl, J., “From Conditional Oughts to Qualitative Decision Theory” in D. Heckerman and A. Mamdani (Eds.),
*Proceedings of the Ninth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence*, Washington, D.C., Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 12–20, July 1993.Google Scholar - [Pearl, 1993b]Pearl, J., “Graphical models, causality, and intervention,”
*Statistical Science*, 8 (3), 266–273, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Pearl, 1994b]Pearl, J., “A probabilistic calculus of actions,” in R. Lopez de Mantaras and D. Poole (Eds.),
*Proceedings of the Tenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI-94)*, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 454–462, 1994.Google Scholar - [Pearl, 1995]Pearl, J., “Causal diagrams for experimental research, (with discussion),”
*Biometrika*, 82 (4), 669–709, December 1995.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Pratt & Schlaifer, 1988]Pratt, J.W. and Schlaifer, R., “On the interpretation and observation of laws,”
*Journal of Econometrics*, 39, 23–52, 1988.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Robins, 1986]Robins, J., “A new approach to causal inference in mortality studies with a sustained exposure period–applications to control of the healthy workers survivor effect,”
*Mathematical Modelling*, 7, 1393–1512, 1986.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Sobel 1990]Sobel, M.E., “Effect analysis and causation in linear structural equation models,”
*Psychometrika*, 55 (3), 495–515, 1990.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Spirtes et al., 1993]Spirtes, P., Glymour, C., and Schienes, R.,
*Causation, Prediction, and Search*, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1993.zbMATHGoogle Scholar - [Strotz & Wold, 1960]Strotz, R.H. and Wold, H.O.A., “Recursive versus nonrecursive systems: An attempt at synthesis,”
*Econometrica*28, 417–427, 1960.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - [Wermuth, 1992]Wermuth, N., “On block-recursive regression equations” (with discus- sion),
*Brazilian Journal of Probability and Statistics*, 6, 1–56, 1992.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - [Whittaker, 1990]Whittaker, J.,
*Graphical Models in Applied Multivariate Statistics*, John Wiley and Sons, Chinchester, England, 1990.zbMATHGoogle Scholar

## Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 1996