Judea Pearl
- Angrist, J. D., Imbens, G. W. & Rubin, D. B. (1995). Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 91, 444–455, 1996.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Balke, A. & Pearl, J. (1994). Counterfactual probabilities: Computational methods, bounds, and applications. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Ed. R. Lopez de Mantaras and D. Poole, pp. 46–54. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
- Bowden, R. J. & Turkington, D. A. (1984). Instrumental Variables. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Cox, D. R. (1958). The Planning of Experiments. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
- Cox, D. R. (1992). Causality: Some statistical aspects. J. R. Statist. Soc. A 155, 291–301.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cox, D. R. & Wermuth, N. (1993). Linear dependencies represented by chain graphs. Statist. Sci. 8, 204–18.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dawid, A. P. (1979). Conditional independence in statistical theory (with Discussion). J. R. Statist. Soc. B 41, 1–31.Google Scholar
- Fisher, F. M. (1970). A correspondence principle for simultaneous equation models. Econometrica 38, 73–92.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Freedman, D. (1987). As others see us: A case study in path analysis (with Discussion). J. Educ. Statist. 12, 101–223.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Frisch, R. (1938). Statistical versus theoretical relations in economic macrodynamics. League of Nations Memorandum. Reproduced (1948) in Autonomy of Economic Relations, Universitetets Socialokonomiske Institutt, Oslo.Google Scholar
- Galles, D. & Pearl, J. (1995). Testing identifiability of causal effects. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence—11, Ed. P. Besnard and S. Hanks, pp. 185–95. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
- Geiger, D., Verma, T. S. & Pearl, J. (1990). Identifying independence in Bayesian networks. Networks 20, 507–34.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Goldberger, A. S. (1972). Structural equation models in the social sciences. Econometrica 40, 979–1001.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Haavelmo, T. (1943). The statistical implications of a system of simultaneous equations. Econometrica 11, 1–12.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Holland, P. W. (1988). Causal inference, path analysis, and recursive structural equations models. In Sociological Methodology, Ed. C. Clogg, pp. 449–84. Washington, D.C.: American Sociological Association.Google Scholar
- Imbens, G. W. & Angrist, J. D. (1994). Identification and estimation of local average treatment effects. Econometrica 62, 467–76.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lauritzen, S. L., Dawid, A. P., Larsen, B. N. & Leimer, H. G. (1990). Independence properties of directed Markov fields. Networks 20, 491–505.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lauritzen, S. L. & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (1988). Local computations with probabilities on graphical structures and their applications to expert systems (with Discussion). J. R. Statist. Soc. B 50, 157–224.Google Scholar
- Manski, C. F. (1990). Nonparametric bounds on treatment effects. Am. Econ. Rev., Papers Proc. 80, 319–23.Google Scholar
- Pearl, J. (1988). Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pearl, J. (1993a). Belief networks revisited. Artif. Intel. 59, 49–56.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pearl, J. (1993b). Comment: Graphical models, causality, and intervention. Statist. Sci. 8, 266-9.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pearl, J. (1994a). From Bayesian networks to causal networks. In Bayesian Networks and Probabilistic Reasoning, Ed. A. Gammerman, pp. 1–31. London: Alfred Walter.Google Scholar
- Pearl, J. (1994b). A probabilistic calculus of actions. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Ed. R. Lopez de Mantaras and D. Poole, pp. 452–62. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
- Pearl, J. (1995). Causal inference from indirect experiments. Artif. Intel. Med. J., 7, 561–582, 1995.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pearl, J. & Verma, T. (1991). A theory of inferred causation. In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference, Ed. J. A. Allen, R. Fikes and E. Sandewall, pp. 441–52. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
- Pratt, J. W. & Schlaifer, R. (1988). On the interpretation and observation of laws. J. Economet. 39, 23–52.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robins, J. M. (1986). A new approach to causal inference in mortality studies with a sustained exposure period—applications to control of the healthy workers survivor effect. Math. Model. 7, 1393–512.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robins, J. M. (1989). The analysis of randomized and non-randomized AIDS treatment trials using a new approach to causal inference in longitudinal studies. In Health Service Research Methodology: A Focus on AIDS, Ed. L. Sechrest, H. Freeman and A. Mulley, pp. 113–59. Washington, D.C.: NCHSR, U.S. Public Health Service.Google Scholar
- Robins, J. M., Blevins, D., Ritter, G. & Wulfsohn, M. (1992). G-estimation of the effect of prophylaxis therapy for pneumocystis carinii pneumonia on the survival of AIDS patients. Epidemiology 3, 319–36.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rosenbaum, P. R. (1984). The consequences of adjustment for a concomitant variable that has been affected by the treatment. J. R. Statist. Soc. A 147, 656–66.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rosenbaum, P. & Rubin, D. (1983). The central role of propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70, 41–55.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rubin, D. B. (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. J. Educ. Psychol. 66, 688–701.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rubin, D. B. (1978). Bayesian inference for causal effects: The role of randomization. Ann. Statist. 7, 34–58.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rubin, D. B. (1990). Neyman (1923) and causal inference in experiments and observational studies. Statist. Sci. 5, 472–80.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Simon, H. A. (1953). Causal ordering and identifiability. In Studies in Econometric Method, Ed. W. C. Hood and T. C. Hoopmans, Ch. 3. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
- Sobel, M. E. (1990). Effect analysis and causation in linear structural equation models. Psychometrika 55, 495–515.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Spiegelhalter, D. J., Lauritzen, S. L., Dawid, A. P. & Cowell, R. G. (1993). Bayesian analysis in expert systems (with Discussion). Statist. Sci. 8, 219–47.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Spirtes, P. (1995). Directed cyclic graphical representations of feedback models. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence 11, Ed. P. Besnard and S. Hanks, pp. 491–98. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
- Spirtes, P., Glymour, C. & Scheines, R. (1993). Causation, Prediction, and Search. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Strotz, R. H. & Wold, H. O. A. (1960). Recursive versus nonrecursive systems: An attempt at synthesis. Econometrica 28, 417–27.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wainer, H. (1989). Eelworms, bullet holes, and Geraldine Ferraro: Some problems with statistical adjustment and some solutions. J. Educ. Statist. 14, 121–40.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wermuth, N. (1992). On block-recursive regression equations (with Discussion). Brazilian J. Prob. Statist. 6, 1–56.Google Scholar
- Whittaker, J. (1990). Graphical Models in Applied Multivariate Statistics. Chichester: John Wiley.Google Scholar
- Wright, S. (1921). Correlation and causation. J. Agric. Res. 20, 557–85.Google Scholar
- Balke, A. & Pearl, J. (1995). Counterfactuals and policy analysis in structural models. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence 11, Ed. P. Besnard and S. Hanks, pp. 11–8. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
- Bishop, Y. M. M., Fienberg, S. E. & Holland, P. W. (1975). Discrete Multivariate Analysis: Theory and Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Box, G. E. P. (1966). The use and abuse of regression. Technometrics 8, 625–9.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cameron, E. & Pauling, L. (1976). Supplemental ascorbate in the supportive treatment of cancer: prolongation of survival times in terminal human cancer. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. (USA), 73, 3685–9.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cochran, W. G. (1965). The planning of observational studies of human populations (with Discussion). J. R. Statist. Soc. A 128, 134–55.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cochran, W. G. & Cox, G. M. (1957). Experimental Designs, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Cornfield, J., Haenszel, W., Hammond, E., Lilienfeld, A., Shimkin, M. & Wynder, E. (1959). Smoking and lung cancer: Recent evidence and a discussion of some questions. J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 22, 173–203.Google Scholar
- Dawid, A. P. (1984). Statistical theory. The prequential approach (with Discussion). J. R. Statist. Soc. A 147, 278–92.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dawid, A. P. (1991). Fisherian inference in likelihood and prequential frames of reference (with Discussion). J. R. Statist. Soc. B 53, 79–109.Google Scholar
- Fairfield Smith, H. (1957). Interpretation of adjusted treatment means and regressions in analysis of covariance. Biometrics 13, 282–308.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fisher, R. A. (1935). The Design of Experiments. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
- Freedman, D. (1991). Statistical models and shoe leather (with Discussion). In Sociological Methodology 1991, Ed. P. Marsden, Ch. 10. Washington, D.C.: American Sociological Association.Google Scholar
- Freedman, D. (1995). Some issues in the foundation of statistics (with Discussion). Foundat. Sci. 1, 19–83.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Goldberger, A. S. (1973). Structural equation methods in the social sciences. Econometrica 40, 979–1001.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Herzberg, A. M. & Cox, D. R. (1969). Recent work on design of experiments: A bibliography and a review. J. R. Statist. Soc. A 132, 29–67.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hill, A. B. (1971). A Short Textbook of Medical Statistics, 10th ed. Place: Lippincott.Google Scholar
- Holland, P. (1986). Statistical and causal inference. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 81, 945–70.Google ScholarCross Ref
- May, G., DeMets, D., Friedman, L., Furberg, C. & Passamani, E. (1981). The randomized clinical trial: Bias in analysis. Circulation 64, 669–73.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Moertel, C., Fleming, T., Creagan, E., Rubin, J., O’Connell, M. & Ames, M. (1985). High-dose vitamin C versus placebo in the treatment of patients with advanced cancer who have had no prior chemotherapy: A randomized double-blind comparison. New Engl. J. Med. 312, 137–41.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Neyman, J. (1923). On the application of probability theory to agricultural experiments. Essay on Principles, Section 9. Transl. (1990) in Statist. Sci. 5, 465–80.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robins, J. M. (1987a). A graphical approach to the identification and estimation of causal parameters in mortality studies with sustained exposure periods. J. Chronic Dis. 40, Suppl. 2, 139S–161S.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robins, J. M. (1987b). Addendum to ‘A new approach to causal inference in mortality studies with sustained exposure periods—application to control of the healthy worker survivor effect’. Comp. Math. Applic. 14, 923–45.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robins, J. M. (1993). Analytic methods for estimating HIV treatment and cofactor effects. In Methodological Issues of AIDS Mental Health Research, Ed. D. G. Ostrow and R. Kessler, pp. 213–90. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
- Rosenbaum, P. R. (1984a). From association to causation in observational studies. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 79, 41–8.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rosenbaum, P. R. (1993). Hodges–Lehmann point estimates of treatment effect in observational studies. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 88, 1250–3.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rosenbaum, P. R. (1995). Observational Studies. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rubin, D. B. (1976). Inference and missing data (with Discussion). Biometrika 63, 581–92.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Shafer, G. (1996). The Art of Causal Conjecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Smith, H. F. (1957). Interpretation of adjusted treatment means and regressions in analysis of covariates. Biometrics 13, 282–308.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Vovk, V. G. (1993). A logic of probability, with application to the foundations of statistics (with Discussion). J. R. Statist. Soc. B 55, 317–51.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Causal Diagrams for Empirical Research (With Discussions)
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
An empirical investigation of intuitive understandability of process diagrams
ContextBusiness process modeling is an activity that includes several different roles, e.g. business analysts, technical analysts and software developers. The resulting process diagrams can be either simple or complex. Nonetheless, they must be ...
Constraint Diagrams: A Step Beyond UML
TOOLS '99: Proceedings of the Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and SystemsThe Unified Modeling Language (UML) is a set of notations for modelling object-oriented systems. It has become the de facto standard. Most of its notations are diagrammatic. An exception to this is the Object Constraint Language (OCL) which is ...
Causal Reasoning with Neuron Diagrams
VLHCC '10: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric ComputingThe principle of causation is fundamental to science and society and has remained an active topic of discourse in philosophy for over two millennia. Modern philosophers often rely on ``neuron diagrams'', a domain-specific visual language for discussing ...
Comments