Talk:Causal model

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Definition(s)[edit]

In response to this remark I have found several definitions looking for "a causal model is" in Google-books, for example:

  • "According to a formal definition, a causal model is a mathematical object that provides an interpretation and computation of causal queries about the domain [Galles & Pearl 1998]..." [1]
  • "A causal model is composed by a set of logical formulae which expresses different kinds of relationships among entities belonging to different types..." [2]
  • "A causal model is an advanced form of dependency model that allows modelling the various scenarios that can lead to a defined state - in our case, the winding down of a ..." [3]
  • "A causal model is a unique model describing the mechanisms of the system..." [4]

Now I am not sure how this could be integrated into the article, but could be a good start. -- Mdd (talk) 21:13, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion[edit]

Just did a vast expansion of this. Feedback encouraged. Particular items:

  • Errors. This is a complex subject. Please flag any errors and I will fix them.
  • Organization. The major source of the piece is Pearl's book. It only sort of uses the organization I ended up adopting. I'd appreciate your suggestions for how to improve that bit (and anything else, for sure).
  • Clarity. This piece is pretty abstract. The book does a better job than the article of including examples as a path to clarity. For brevity, I left most of this out and shifted the focus to more abstract concerns. Are more examples needed? Where? Are Pearl's examples the ones to go with?

TIA. Lfstevens (talk) 14:17, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is causal model falsifiable?[edit]

The article claims causal model is falsifiable: "Causal models are falsifiable, in that if they do not match data, they must be rejected as invalid."

However, this appears very different from the definition of falsifiable: "A theory or hypothesis is falsifiable (or refutable) if it can be logically contradicted by an empirical test that can potentially be executed with existing technologies." on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiable .

The latter definition makes more sense to me. If that definition is more wide accepted, should the falsifiability claim in this article be removed or corrected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.234.189.45 (talk) 21:39, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Add: this claim was added on 23:17, 27 October 2018‎. Before that, there was a specific claim on A->B->C model can be falsified. However, that claim was not based on the latter definition of falsifiability. Even if that claim holds, it remains a question whether it not generalize to all causal models. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.234.189.45 (talk)