A companion set of lecture slides is available at

We examine a graphical representation of uncertain knowledge called a Bayesian network. The representation is easy to construct and interpret, yet has formal probabilistic semantics making it suitable for statistical manipulation. We show how we can use the representation to learn new knowledge by combining domain knowledge with statistical data. 1 Introduction Many techniques for learning rely heavily on data. In contrast, the knowledge encoded in expert systems usually comes solely from an expert. In this paper, we examine a knowledge representation, called a Bayesian network, that lets us have the best of both worlds. Namely, the representation allows us to learn new knowledge by combining expert domain knowledge and statistical data. A Bayesian network is a graphical representation of uncertain knowledge that most people find easy to construct and interpret. In addition, the representation has formal probabilistic semantics, making it suitable for statistical manipulation (Howard,...

This literature review discusses different methods under the general rubric of learning Bayesian networks from data, and includes some overlapping work on more general probabilistic networks. Connections are drawn between the statistical, neural network, and uncertainty communities, and between the different methodological communities, such as Bayesian, description length, and classical statistics. Basic concepts for learning and Bayesian networks are introduced and methods are then reviewed. Methods are discussed for learning parameters of a probabilistic network, for learning the structure, and for learning hidden variables. The presentation avoids formal definitions and theorems, as these are plentiful in the literature, and instead illustrates key concepts with simplified examples. Keywords--- Bayesian networks, graphical models, hidden variables, learning, learning structure, probabilistic networks, knowledge discovery. I. Introduction Probabilistic networks or probabilistic gra...

We propose a new definition of actual causes, using structural equations to model counterfactuals. We show that the definition yields a plausible and elegant account of causation that handles well examples which have caused problems for other definitions

Mining for association rules in market basket data has proved a fruitful area of research. Measures such as conditional probability (confidence) and correlation have been used to infer rules of the form "the existence of item A implies the existence of item B." However, such rules indicate only a statistical relationship between A and B. They do not specify the nature of the relationship: whether the presence of A causes the presence of B, or the converse, or some other attribute or phenomenon causes both to appear together. In applications, knowing such causal relationships is extremely useful for enhancing understanding and effecting change. While distinguishing causality from correlation is a truly difficult problem, recent work in statistics and Bayesian learning provide some avenues of attack. In these fields, the goal has generally been to learn complete causal models, which are essentially impossible to learn in large-scale data mining applications with a large number of variab...

ABayesian network is a probabilistic representation for uncertain relationships, which has proven to be useful for modeling real-world problems. When there are many potential causes of a given e ect, however, both probability assessment and inference using a Bayesian network can be di cult. In this paper, we describe causal independence, a collection of conditional independence assertions and functional relationships that are often appropriate to apply to the representation of the uncertain interactions between causes and e ect. We show how the use of causal independence in a Bayesian network can greatly simplify probability assessment aswell as probabilistic inference. 1

Whereas acausal Bayesian networks represent probabilistic independence, causal Bayesian networks represent causal relationships. In this paper, we examine Bayesian methods for learning both types of networks. Bayesian methods for learning acausal networks are fairly well developed. These methods often employ assumptions to facilitate the construction of priors, including the assumptions of parameter independence, parameter modularity, and likelihood equivalence. We show that although these assumptions also can be appropriate for learning causal networks, we need additional assumptions in order to learn causal networks. We introduce two sufficient assumptions, called mechanism independence and component independence. We show that these new assumptions, when combined with parameter independence, parameter modularity, and likelihood equivalence, allow us to apply methods for learning acausal networks to learn causal networks. 1

Abstract not found

This paper develops axioms and formal semantics for statements of the form "X is causally irrelevant to Y in context Z," which we interpret to mean "Changing X will not affect Y if we hold Z constant." The axiomization of causal irrelevance is contrasted with the axiomization of informational irrelevance, as in "Learning X will not alter our belief in Y , once we know Z." Two versions of causal irrelevance are analyzed, probabilistic and deterministic. We show that, unless stability is assumed, the probabilistic definition yields a very loose structure, that is governed by just two trivial axioms. Under the stability assumption, probabilistic causal irrelevance is isomorphic to path interception in cyclic graphs. Under the deterministic definition, causal irrelevance complies with all of the axioms of path interception in cyclic graphs, with the exception of transitivity. We compare our formalism to that of [Lewis, 1973], and offer a graphical method of proving theorems abou...

Introduction The introduction of Bayesian networks (Pearl 1986b) and associated local computation algorithms (Lauritzen and Spiegelhalter 1988, Shenoy and Shafer 1990, Jensen, Lauritzen and Olesen 1990) has initiated a renewed interest for understanding causal concepts in connection with modelling complex stochastic systems. It has become clear that graphical models, in particular those based upon directed acyclic graphs, have natural causal interpretations and thus form a base for a language in which causal concepts can be discussed and analysed in precise terms. As a consequence there has been an explosion of writings, not primarily within mainstream statistical literature, concerned with the exploitation of this language to clarify and extend causal concepts. Among these we mention in particular books by Spirtes, Glymour and Scheines (1993), Shafer (1996), and Pearl (2000) as well as the collection of papers in Glymour and Cooper (1999). Very briefly, but fundamentally,