Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 13, 2025

09:49
Holistic Facial Composite Creation and Subsequent Video Line-up Eyewitness Identification Paradigm
Published on: December 24, 2015
14.3K
Compositional Causal Identification from Imperfect or Disturbing Observations
Isaac Friend1, Aleks Kissinger1, Robert W Spekkens2
1Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3QD, UK.
Entropy (Basel, Switzerland)
|July 29, 2025
Summary
This study explores causal identification using novel data collection methods beyond passive observation. It finds that
Area of Science:
- Causal inference
- Graphical causal models
- Process theories
Background:
- Traditional causal identification relies on observational data or controlled experiments.
- Generic data collection schemes, including noisy or coarse-grained observations, are increasingly relevant.
- Existing methods may not fully leverage information from these diverse data sources.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate causal identification using probabilities from generic data collection instruments.
- To extend causal inference frameworks to accommodate non-standard observation schemes.
- To establish conditions under which such data suffice for identifying causal quantities.
Main Methods:
- Utilizing process theories (symmetric monoidal categories) to model graphical causal models.
- Formulating causal identification problems with arbitrary sets of data collection instruments.
- Introducing and analyzing the property of 'marginal informational completeness' for instruments.
Main Results:
- Generic instruments satisfying 'marginal informational completeness' can be used for causal identification.
- For Markovian models, these instruments suffice for identifying interventional quantities.
- This extends the applicability of causal inference beyond perfect passive observations.
Conclusions:
- The study demonstrates the sufficiency of 'marginally informationally complete' instruments for causal identification in Markovian models.
- It highlights a distinction between the Markovianity of causal models and probability distributions.
- Suggests a broader scope for causal inference within a process-theoretic framework.
Related Concept Videos
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II
656
The Bradford Hill criteria serve as guidelines for establishing causative links in epidemiological research. Beyond Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality, key criteria also include Biological Gradient, Plausibility, Coherence, Experiment, and Analogy. These principles assist scientists in assessing the likelihood of causation in complex biological contexts. Below is a summary of these concepts:
656
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I
528
The Bradford Hill criteria are a group of principles that provide a framework to determine a causal relationship between a specific factor and a disease. There are nine criteria that are pivotal in assessing causality in epidemiological studies. Here's a closer look at Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality criteria with definitions and examples:
528
Structuralism
1.1K
Structuralism, an early psychological theory developed by Wilhelm Wundt and his student Edward Bradford Titchener, sought to dissect the human mind into its most fundamental components. Wundt's groundbreaking work in his laboratory set the stage for Titchener to define structuralism's goal as cataloging the "atoms" of the mind—sensations, images, and feelings—akin to how chemists identify elements of matter.
Titchener's approach to structuralism was unique. He...
Titchener's approach to structuralism was unique. He...
1.1K
Cause and Effect
11.3K
While variables are sometimes correlated because one does cause the other, it could also be that some other factor, a confounding variable, is actually causing the systematic movement in our variables of interest. For instance, as sales in ice cream increase, so does the overall rate of crime. Is it possible that indulging in your favorite flavor of ice cream could send you on a crime spree? Or, after committing crime do you think you might decide to treat yourself to a cone?
11.3K
Fundamental Attribution Error
13.2K
According to some social psychologists, people tend to overemphasize internal factors as explanations—or attributions—for the behavior of other people. They tend to assume that the behavior of another person is a trait of that person, and to underestimate the power of the situation on the behavior of others. They tend to fail to recognize when the behavior of another is due to situational variables, and thus to the person’s state. This erroneous assumption is...
13.2K
Naturalistic Observations
15.9K
If you want to understand how behavior occurs, one of the best ways to gain information is to simply observe the behavior in its natural context. However, people might change their behavior in unexpected ways if they know they are being observed. How do researchers obtain accurate information when people tend to hide their natural behavior? As an example, imagine that your professor asks everyone in your class to raise their hand if they always wash their hands after using the restroom. Chances...
15.9K

