You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

IlyaShpitser comments on [LINK] If correlation doesn’t imply causation, then what does? - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: Strilanc 12 July 2013 05:39AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (23)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: IlyaShpitser 12 July 2013 04:22:18PM *  4 points [-]

http://www.gatsby.ucl.ac.uk/~zoubin/course05/BayesBall.pdf

Amusing name, linear time algorithm. Also amusingly I happen to have direct line of sight on the author while writing this post :).

In some sense, we know a priori that d-separation has to be linear time because it is a slightly fancy graph traversal. If you don't like Bayes Ball, you can use the moralization algorithm due to Lauritzen (described here:

http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~steffen/teaching/grad/graphicalmodels.pdf

see slide titled "alternative equivalent separation"), which is slightly harder to follow for an unaided human, but which has a very simple implementation (which reduces to a simple DFS traversal of an undirected graph you construct).

edit: fixed links, hopefully.

Comment author: [deleted] 13 July 2013 03:58:54AM 1 point [-]

Yeah, sadly both links are broken for me.

Comment author: Qiaochu_Yuan 13 July 2013 12:11:20AM 1 point [-]

Link is broken for me.