2020
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2006.05978
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Structure Learning for Cyclic Linear Causal Models

Carlos Améndola,
Philipp Dettling,
Mathias Drton
et al.

Abstract: We consider the problem of structure learning for linear causal models based on observational data. We treat models given by possibly cyclic mixed graphs, which allow for feedback loops and effects of latent confounders. Generalizing related work on bow-free acyclic graphs, we assume that the underlying graph is simple. This entails that any two observed variables can be related through at most one direct causal effect and that (confounding-induced) correlation between error terms in structural equations occur… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 20 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…First, while T2-DAG requires that the auxiliary pathway information can be represented by a DAG, it is feasible to extend it to non-DAG pathways with more complex gene interactions. For example, the recently proposed linear SEM for cyclic mixed graphs (Améndola et al, 2020) provides a possible way to account for feedback loops and undirected edges in the gene pathway. Second, the proposed test assumes a diagonal covariance matrix R for the error term in (2).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, while T2-DAG requires that the auxiliary pathway information can be represented by a DAG, it is feasible to extend it to non-DAG pathways with more complex gene interactions. For example, the recently proposed linear SEM for cyclic mixed graphs (Améndola et al, 2020) provides a possible way to account for feedback loops and undirected edges in the gene pathway. Second, the proposed test assumes a diagonal covariance matrix R for the error term in (2).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%