Strong Completeness and Faithfulness in Bayesian Networks
Open accessAbstract
A completeness result for d-separation applied to discrete Bayesian networks is presented and it is shown that in a strong measure-theoretic sense almost all discrete distributions for a given network structure are faithful; i.e. the independence facts true of the distribution are all and only those entailed by the network structure.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Causal faithfulness holds for almost all causal models.
“Formally, we can identify the underlying causal model (up to latent confounders) by assuming causal faithfulness, which holds for almost all causal models (Meek, 2013).”
From Robust agents learn causal world models (2024) · cites this paper as Meek, 2013
Section 3 (p. 3) states that, for a fixed directed acyclic graph, unfaithful discrete and Gaussian Bayesian-network distributions have measure zero in their parameter spaces. This supports “almost all” in a measure-theoretic sense, but the claim extends the result to causal models generally, beyond the classes established in the paper. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredAlmost all P are causally faithful.
“Almost all P are causally faithful (Meek, 2013).”
From Robust agents learn causal world models (2024) · cites this paper as Meek, 2013
The measure-zero theorems in §3 (p. 3) say that, for a fixed directed acyclic graph, unfaithful discrete and Gaussian distributions form a measure-zero set of parameterizations. This supports “almost all” within those model classes, but the citing sentence leaves P unrestricted and calls the faithfulness causal, which the cited result does not establish. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 13 · Cited by 194
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Bouckaert, R. (1993). Probabilistic network construc tion using the minimum description length princi ple. In Lecture notes in comp. sci. 747, pp. 41-48.
- Frydenberg, M. (1990). Marginalization and collapsi bility in graphical interaction models. Annals of Statistics 18(2).
- Geiger, D. and J. Pearl (1988b k On the logic of influ ence diagrams. In Proc. 4 h workshop on Unc. in AI, Minneapolis, MN, pp. 136-147.
- Pearl, J. and T. Verma (1991). A theory of inferred causation. In Allen, Fikes, and Sandwall (Eds.), Principles of knowledge representation and rea soning: Proc. of the 2 n d Int. conf, pp. 441-452. San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann.
- Sclove, S. (1994). Small-sample and large-sample sta tistical model selection criteria. In Selecting Mod els from Data, pp. 31-41. Springer-Verlag.
- Spirtes, P., C. Glymour, and R. Scheines (1993). Cau sation, Prediction, and Search. Springer-Verlag.
- Whittaker, J. (1990). Graphical Models in applied mul tivariate statistics. Wiley.
- Authors
- Meek, C.
- Affiliations
- Carnegie Mellon University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Meek, Christopher
- ORCID
- Meek, Christopher
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2013
- Pages
- 411-418
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1302.4973
- OpenAlex
- W1899161704
- Cited by
- 194
- References
- 13
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 15
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence
- Funders
- Office of Naval Research (N00014)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Advanced Graph Theory Research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
- Keywords
- Bayesian networks, d-separation, strong completeness, faithfulness, discrete distributions, conditional independence, network structure
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
