Skip to main content

Causality, Simpson’s Paradox, and Context-Specific Independence

  • Conference paper
Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU 2005)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 3571))

Abstract

Cognitive psychologist Patricia Cheng suggests that erroneous causal inference is perhaps too often incorrectly attributed to problems with the process of inference rather than the data on which the inference is carried out. In this paper, we discuss the role of incomplete data in making faulty inferences and where those problems arise. We focus on one of two potential problems in the data we call ‘unmeasured-in’ and ‘unmeasured-out’ and address a generalization of the causal knowledge in the hope of detecting independencies hidden inside variables, causing the system to behave less than adequately.

The interpretation of the data can be more representative of the problem domain by examining subsets of values for variables in the data. We show how to do this with a generalized form of statistical independence that can resolve relevance problems in the causal model. The most interesting finding is how the examination of contexts can formalize the paradoxical statements in Simpson’s paradox and how a simple detection method can eliminate the problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Boutilier, C., Friedman, N., Goldszmidt, M., Koller, D.: Context-specific independence in bayesian networks. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 115–123 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Butz, C.J., Sanscartier, M.J.: A method for detecting context-specific independence in conditional probability tables. In: Third International Conference on Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing, pp. 344–348 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cartwright, N.: Causal laws and effective strategies. Nous 13(4), 419–437 (1979)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Cartwright, N.: Nature, Capacities and their Measurements. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cheng, P.W., Novick, L.R.: A probabilistic contrast of causal induction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 58, 545–567 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cohen, M.R., Nagel, E.: An Introduction to Logic and Scientific Method. Brace and Co., New York (1934)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Dennis, L.K., Beane Freeman, L.F., Vanbeek, M.J.: Sunscreen use and the risk for melanoma: a quantitative review. Annals of Internal Medicine 139(12), 966–978 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Esposito, F., Malerba, D., Semeraro, G.: Discovering probabilistic causal relationships: A comparison between two methods. Lecture Notes in Statistics: Selecting Models from Data, vol. 89 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Good, I.J.: A causal calculus. British Journal for Philosophy of Science 11 (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sprites, P., Glymour, C., Scheines, R.: Causation, prediction and search. Lecture Notes in Statistics, vol. 81 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pearl, J.: Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pearl, J.: Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference. Cambridge University Press, New York (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Pearl, J., Verma, T.S.: A theory of infered causation. In: Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Second International Conference, pp. 441–452. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Reichenbach, H.: The Direction of Time. University of California Press, Berkeley (1956)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Simpson, E.H.: The interpretation of interaction in contingency tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 13(B), 238–241 (1951)

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Wong, S.K.M., Butz, C.J.: Contextual weak independence in baysian networks. In: Fifteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 670–679 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Suppes, P.: A Probabilistic Theory of Causation. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Zhang, N., Poole, D.: On the role of context-specific independence in probabilistic reasoning. In: Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1288–1293 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Sanscartier, M.J., Neufeld, E. (2005). Causality, Simpson’s Paradox, and Context-Specific Independence. In: Godo, L. (eds) Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty. ECSQARU 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3571. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11518655_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11518655_21

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-27326-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31888-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics