Confidence Sets for Causal Orderings
因果顺序的置信集合AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要明确研究因果发现中的顺序不确定性及考虑模型不确定性的因果效应推断。
因果顺序的置信集合AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Causal discovery procedures aim to deduce causal relationships among variables in a multivariate dataset. While various methods have been proposed for estimating a single causal model or a single equivalence class of models, less attention has been given to quantifying uncertainty in causal discovery in terms of confidence statements. A primary challenge in causal discovery of directed acyclic graphs is determining a causal ordering among the variables, and our work offers a framework for constructing confidence sets of causal orderings that the data do not rule out. Our methodology specifically applies to identifiable structural equation models with additive errors and is based on a residual bootstrap procedure to test the goodness-of-fit of causal orderings. We demonstrate the asymptotic validity of the confidence set constructed using this goodness-of-fit test and explain how the confidence set may be used to form sub/supersets of ancestral relationships as well as confidence intervals for causal effects that incorporate model uncertainty.