Cited by 230Bayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceLogic, Reasoning, and KnowledgeAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Influence Diagrams for Causal Modelling and Inference

Dawid, A. P.·2002·International Statistical Review

Abstract

Summary We consider a variety of ways in which probabilistic and causal models can be represented in graphical form. By adding nodes to our graphs to represent parameters, decision,etc., we obtain a generalisation of influence diagrams that supports meaningful causal modelling and inference, and only requires concepts and methods that are already standard in the purely probabilistic case. We relate our representations to others, particularly functional models, and present arguments and examples in favour of their superiority.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1751-5823.2002.tb00354.x

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 40 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Balke A.A., 1994, Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Uncertainty in Artifical Intelligence, 46
  2. Dawid A.P., 2002, Discussion of Lauritzen & Richardson (2002), Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 64
  3. Frydenberg M., 1990, The chain graph Markov property, Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 17, 333
  4. Nilsson D., 2000, Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference on Uncertainty in Artifical Intelligence, 436
  5. Pearl J., 2000, Causality
  6. Pearl J., 1995, Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 444
  7. Raiffa H., 1968, Decision Analysis
  8. Robins J.M., 1989, Health Service Research Methodology: A Focus on Aids, 113
  9. Studeny M.(2001).On non‐graphical description of models of conditional independence structure. Paper presented at HSSS Workshop on Stochastic Systems for Individual Behaviours 22–23 January 2001 Louvain la Neuve Belgium.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–227 of 227

Metadata

Authors
Dawid, A. P.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Dawid, A. P.
Venue
International Statistical Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-08
Volume
70
Issue
2
Pages
161-189
ISSN
  • 0306-7734 (ISSN-L)
  • 1751-5823
OpenAlex
W2169315100
Cited by
230
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 24
FWCI
5.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Statistical Review (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
Keywords
influence diagrams, causal models, causal inference, probabilistic graphical models, decision models, functional model, decision analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review