We consider the PC-algorithm (Spirtes et al., 2000) for estimating the skeleton and equivalence class of a very high-dimensional directed acyclic graph (DAG) with corresponding Gaussian distribution. The PC-algorithm is computationally feasible and often very fast for sparse problems with many nodes (variables), and it has the attractive property to automatically achieve high computational efficiency as a function of sparseness of the true underlying DAG. We prove uniform consistency of the algorithm for very high-dimensional, sparse DAGs where the number of nodes is allowed to quickly grow with sample size n, as fast as O(n a) for any 0 < a < ∞. The sparseness assumption is rather minimal requiring only that the neighborhoods in the DAG are of lower order than sample size n. We also demonstrate the PC-algorithm for simulated data. Keywords: asymptotic consistency, DAG, graphical model, PC-algorithm, skeleton 1.

ABSTRACT: I describe two new methods for estimating the optimal treatment regime (equivalently, protocol, plan or strategy) from very high dimesional observational and experimental data: (i) g-estimation of an optimal double-regime structural nested mean model (drSNMM) and (ii) g-estimation of a standard single regime SNMM combined with sequential dynamicprogramming (DP) regression. These methods are compared to certain regression methods found in the sequential decision and reinforcement learning literatures and to the regret modelling methods of Murphy (2003). I consider both Bayesian and frequentist inference. In particular, I propose a novel “Bayes-frequentist compromise ” that combines honest subjective non- or semiparametric Bayesian inference with good frequentist behavior, even in cases where the model is so large and the likelihood function so complex that standard (uncompromised) Bayes procedures have poor frequentist performance. 1

Given a set of random variables, it is often the case that their associations can be explained by hidden common causes. We present a set of well-defined assumptions and a provably correct algorithm that allow us to identify some of such hidden common causes. The assumptions are fairly general and sometimes weaker than those used in practice by, for instance, econometricians, psychometricians, social scientists and in many other fields where latent variable models are important and tools such as factor analysis are applicable. The goal is automated knowledge discovery: identifying latent variables that can be used across diferent applications and causal models and throw new insights over a data generating process. Our approach is evaluated throught simulations and three real-world cases.

A fundamental question in causal inference is whether it is possible to reliably infer the manipulation effects from observational data. There are a variety of senses of asymptotic reliability in the statistical literature, among which the most commonly discussed frequentist notions are pointwise consistency and uniform consistency (see, e.g. Bickel, Doksum [2001]). Uniform consistency is in general preferred to pointwise consistency because the former allows us to control the worst case error bounds with a finite sample size. In the sense of pointwise consistency, several reliable causal inference algorithms have been established under the Markov and Faithfulness assumptions [Pearl 2000, Spirtes et al. 2001]. In the sense of uniform consistency, however, reliable causal inference is impossible under the two assumptions when time order is unknown and/or latent confounders are present [Robins et al. 2000]. In this paper we present two natural generalizations of the Faithfulness assumption in the context of structural equation models, under which we show that the typical algorithms in the literature are uniformly consistent with or without modifications even when the time order is unknown. We also discuss the situation where latent confounders may be present and the sense in which the Faithfulness assumption is a limiting case of the stronger assumptions.

Consider the query: Does a binary treatment X have a causal effect on a response Y through a causal pathway that does not involve the intermediate variable M? This query is often rephrased as: Does X have a direct causal effect on Y not through M? Direct effects have been formally defined in three different ways: the controlled direct effects (CDE), the natural direct effects (i.e. pure and total direct effects- PDE and TDE), and the principal stratum direct effects (PSDE). In this issue of the journal, Hafeman and VanderWeele (H&V) 7 provide novel minimal or near minimal conditions for identification of the CDE, PDE and TDE but do not consider the PSDE. In this commentary, we review inference for direct effects and the results of H&V. We also review the close relationship between the direct effects literature and the literature on instrumental variables and Mendelian randomization. 1 Formal Definitions To proceed, we review the formal definitions of the three types of direct effects. We first consider a study with baseline covariates C, a dichotomous treatment X

Causal discovery from observational data in the presence of unobserved variables is challenging. Identification of so-called Y substructures is a sufficient condition for ascertaining some causal relations in the large sample limit, without the assumption of no hidden common causes. An example of a Y substructure is A → C, B → C, C → D. This paper describes the first asymptotically reliable and computationally feasible scorebased search for discrete Y structures that does not assume that there are no unobserved common causes. For any parameterization of a directed acyclic graph (DAG) that has scores with the property that any DAG that can represent the distribution beats any DAG that can’t, and for two DAGs that represent the distribution, if one has fewer parameters than the other, the one with the fewest parameter wins. In this framework there is no need to assign scores to causal structures with unobserved common causes. The paper also describes how the existence of a Y structure shows the presence of an unconfounded causal relation, without assuming that there are no hidden common causes. 1

This paper explores the following question: what kind of statistical guarantees can be given when doing variable variable in high dimensional models? In particular, we look at the error rates and power of some multi-stage regression methods. In the first stage we fit a set of candidate models. In the second stage we select one model by cross-validation. In the third stage we use hypothesis testing to eliminate some vari-ables. We refer to the first two stages as “screening ” and the last stage as “cleaning.” We consider three screening methods: the lasso, marginal regression, and forward stepwise regression. Our method also gives consistent variable selection under weak conditions. 1

Abstract not found

A principal aim of many sciences is to model causal systems well enough to provide insight into their structures and mechanisms and to provide reliable predictions about the effects of policy interventions. To

We assume that we have observational data, generated from an unknown underlying directed acyclic graph (DAG) model. A DAG is typically not identifiable from observational data, but it is possible to consistently estimate the equivalence class of a DAG. Moreover, for any given DAG, causal effects can be estimated using intervention calculus. In this paper, we combine these two parts. For each DAG in the estimated equivalence class, we use intervention calculus to estimate the causal effects of the covariates on the response. This yields a collection of estimated causal effects for each covariate. We show that the distinct values in this set can be consistently estimated by an algorithm that uses only local information of the graph. This local approach is computationally fast and feasible in high-dimensional problems. We propose to use summary measures of the set of possible causal effects to determine variable importance. In particular, we use the minimum absolute value of this set, since that is a lower bound on the size of the causal effect. We demonstrate the merits of our methods in a simulation study, and on a data set about riboflavin production. 1. Introduction. Our