Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3191. 	[Title] Model Selection and Accounting for Model Uncertainty in Linear Regression Models [Abstract] 1 Adrian E. Raftery is Professor of Statistics and Sociology, David Madigan is Assistant Professor of Statistics, and Jennifer Hoeting is a Ph.D. Candidate, all at the Department of Statistics, GN-22, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. The research of Raftery and Hoeting was supported by ONR Contract N-00014-91-J-1074. Madigan's research was partially supported by NSF grant no. DMS 92111627. The authors are grateful to Danika Lew for research assistance. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #653441. 	[Title] FROM BAYESIAN NETWORKS TO CAUSAL NETWORKS [Abstract] This paper demonstrates the use of graphs as a mathematical tool for expressing independencies, and as a formal language for communicating and processing causal information for decision analysis. We show how complex information about external interventions can be organized and represented graphically and, conversely, how the graphical representation can be used to facilitate quantitative predictions of the effects of interventions. We first review the theory of Bayesian networks and show that directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) offer an economical scheme for representing conditional independence assumptions and for deducing and displaying all the logical consequences of such assumptions. We then introduce the manipulative account of causation and show that any DAG defines a simple transformation which tells us how the probability distribution will change as a result of external interventions in the system. Using this transformation it is possible to quantify, from non-experimental data, the effects of external interventions and to specify conditions under which randomized experiments are not necessary. As an example, we show how the effect of smoking on lung cancer can be quantified from non-experimental data, using a minimal set of qualitative assumptions. Finally, the paper offers a graphical interpretation for Rubin's model of causal effects, and demonstrates its equivalence to the manipulative account of causation. We exemplify the tradeoffs between the two approaches by deriving nonparametric bounds on treatment effects under conditions of imperfect compliance. fl Portions of this paper were presented at the 49th Session of the International Statistical Institute, Florence, Italy, August 25 - September 3, 1993. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #523394. 	[Title] Automated Discovery of Linear Feedback Models 1 [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1131267. 	[Title] Parallel Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling. [Abstract] Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) samplers have proved remarkably popular as tools for Bayesian computation. However, problems can arise in their application when the density of interest is high dimensional and strongly correlated. In these circumstances the sampler may be slow to traverse the state space and mixing is poor. In this article we offer a partial solution to this problem. The state space of the Markov chain is augmented to accommodate multiple chains in parallel. Updates to individual chains are based around a genetic style crossover operator acting on `parent' states drawn from the population of chains. This process makes efficient use of gradient information implicitly encoded within the distribution of states across the population. Empirical studies support the claim that the crossover operator acting on a parallel population of chains improves mixing. This is illustrated with an example of sampling a high dimensional posterior probability density from a complex predictive model. By adopting a latent variable approach the methodology is extended to deal with variable selection and model averaging in high dimensions. This is illustrated with an example of knot selection for a spline interpolant. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #189571. 	[Title] Probabilistic evaluation of counterfactual queries [Abstract] To appear in the Twelfth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-94), Seattle, WA, July 31 August 4, 1994. Technical Report R-213-A April, 1994 Abstract Evaluation of counterfactual queries (e.g., "If A were true, would C have been true?") is important to fault diagnosis, planning, and determination of liability. We present a formalism that uses probabilistic causal networks to evaluate one's belief that the counterfactual consequent, C, would have been true if the antecedent, A, were true. The antecedent of the query is interpreted as an external action that forces the proposition A to be true, which is consistent with Lewis' Miraculous Analysis. This formalism offers a concrete embodiment of the "closest world" approach which (1) properly reflects common understanding of causal influences, (2) deals with the uncertainties inherent in the world, and (3) is amenable to machine representation. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6786. 	[Title] Bayesian Model Selection in Social Research (with Discussion by [Abstract] 1 This article will be published in Sociological Methodology 1995, edited by Peter V. Marsden, Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwells. Adrian E. Raftery is Professor of Statistics and Sociology, Department of Sociology, DK-40, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. This research was supported by NIH grant no. 5R01HD26330. I would like to thank Robert Hauser, Michael Hout, Steven Lewis, Scott Long, Diane Lye, Peter Marsden, Bruce Western, Yu Xie and two anonymous reviewers for detailed comments on an earlier version. I am also grateful to Clem Brooks, Sir David Cox, Tom DiPrete, John Goldthorpe, David Grusky, Jennifer Hoeting, Robert Kass, David Madigan, Michael Sobel and Chris Volinsky for helpful discussions and correspondence. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #189572. 	[Title] Counterfactuals and Policy Analysis in Structural Models [Abstract] Evaluation of counterfactual queries (e.g., "If A were true, would C have been true?") is important to fault diagnosis, planning, determination of liability, and policy analysis. We present a method for evaluating counter-factuals when the underlying causal model is represented by structural models a nonlinear generalization of the simultaneous equations models commonly used in econometrics and social sciences. This new method provides a coherent means for evaluating policies involving the control of variables which, prior to enacting the policy were influenced by other variables in the system. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #24966. 	[Title] A Practical Bayesian Framework for Backprop Networks [Abstract] A quantitative and practical Bayesian framework is described for learning of mappings in feedforward networks. The framework makes possible: (1) objective comparisons between solutions using alternative network architectures; (2) objective stopping rules for network pruning or growing procedures; (3) objective choice of magnitude and type of weight decay terms or additive regularisers (for penalising large weights, etc.); (4) a measure of the effective number of well-determined parameters in a model; (5) quantified estimates of the error bars on network parameters and on network output; (6) objective comparisons with alternative learning and interpolation models such as splines and radial basis functions. The Bayesian `evidence' automatically embodies `Occam's razor,' penalising over-flexible and over-complex models. The Bayesian approach helps detect poor underlying assumptions in learning models. For learning models well matched to a problem, a good correlation between generalisation ability and the Bayesian evidence is obtained. This paper makes use of the Bayesian framework for regularisation and model comparison described in the companion paper `Bayesian interpolation' (MacKay, 1991a). This framework is due to Gull and Skilling (Gull, 1989a). Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #16008. 	[Title] [12] J. Whittaker. Graphical Models in Applied Mathematical Multivariate Statis- [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #105865. 	[Title] Statistical Ideas for Selecting Network Architectures [Abstract] Choosing the architecture of a neural network is one of the most important problems in making neural networks practically useful, but accounts of applications usually sweep these details under the carpet. How many hidden units are needed? Should weight decay be used, and if so how much? What type of output units should be chosen? And so on. We address these issues within the framework of statistical theory for model This paper is principally concerned with architecture selection issues for feed-forward neural networks (also known as multi-layer perceptrons). Many of the same issues arise in selecting radial basis function networks, recurrent networks and more widely. These problems occur in a much wider context within statistics, and applied statisticians have been selecting and combining models for decades. Two recent discussions are [4, 5]. References [3, 20, 21, 22] discuss neural networks from a statistical perspective. choice, which provides a number of workable approximate answers. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #189577. 	[Title] Chain graphs for learning [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #109323. 	[Title] Estimating Bayes Factors via Posterior Simulation with the Laplace-Metropolis Estimator [Abstract] The key quantity needed for Bayesian hypothesis testing and model selection is the marginal likelihood for a model, also known as the integrated likelihood, or the marginal probability of the data. In this paper we describe a way to use posterior simulation output to estimate marginal likelihoods. We describe the basic Laplace-Metropolis estimator for models without random effects. For models with random effects the compound Laplace-Metropolis estimator is introduced. This estimator is applied to data from the World Fertility Survey and shown to give accurate results. Batching of simulation output is used to assess the uncertainty involved in using the compound Laplace-Metropolis estimator. The method allows us to test for the effects of independent variables in a random effects model, and also to test for the presence of the random effects. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #137868. 	[Title] On Bayesian analysis of mixtures with an unknown number of components  Summary [Abstract] New methodology for fully Bayesian mixture analysis is developed, making use of reversible jump Markov chain Monte Carlo methods, that are capable of jumping between the parameter subspaces corresponding to different numbers of components in the mixture. A sample from the full joint distribution of all unknown variables is thereby generated, and this can be used as a basis for a thorough presentation of many aspects of the posterior distribution. The methodology is applied here to the analysis of univariate normal mixtures, using a hierarchical prior model that offers an approach to dealing with weak prior information while avoiding the mathematical pitfalls of using improper priors in the mixture context. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #642827. 	[Title] Decomposable graphical Gaussian model determination [Abstract] We propose a methodology for Bayesian model determination in decomposable graphical Gaussian models. To achieve this aim we consider a hyper inverse Wishart prior distribution on the concentration matrix for each given graph. To ensure compatibility across models, such prior distributions are obtained by marginalisation from the prior conditional on the complete graph. We explore alternative structures for the hyperparameters of the latter, and their consequences for the model. Model determination is carried out by implementing a reversible jump MCMC sampler. In particular, the dimension-changing move we propose involves adding or dropping an edge from the graph. We characterise the set of moves which preserve the decomposability of the graph, giving a fast algorithm for maintaining the junction tree representation of the graph at each sweep. As state variable, we propose to use the incomplete variance-covariance matrix, containing only the elements for which the corresponding element of the inverse is nonzero. This allows all computations to be performed locally, at the clique level, which is a clear advantage for the analysis of large and complex data-sets. Finally, the statistical and computational performance of the procedure is illustrated by means of both artificial and real multidimensional data-sets. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #294030. 	[Title] MDL Learning of Probabilistic Neural Networks for Discrete Problem Domains [Abstract] Given a problem, a case-based reasoning (CBR) system will search its case memory and use the stored cases to find the solution, possibly modifying retrieved cases to adapt to the required input specifications. In discrete domains CBR reasoning can be based on a rigorous Bayesian probability propagation algorithm. Such a Bayesian CBR system can be implemented as a probabilistic feedforward neural network with one of the layers representing the cases. In this paper we introduce a Minimum Description Length (MDL) based learning algorithm to obtain the proper network structure with the associated conditional probabilities. This algorithm together with the resulting neural network implementation provide a massively parallel architecture for solving the efficiency bottleneck in case-based reasoning. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #193931. 	[Title] What Size Neural Network Gives Optimal Generalization? Convergence Properties of Backpropagation [Abstract] Technical Report UMIACS-TR-96-22 and CS-TR-3617 Institute for Advanced Computer Studies University of Maryland College Park, MD 20742 Abstract One of the most important aspects of any machine learning paradigm is how it scales according to problem size and complexity. Using a task with known optimal training error, and a pre-specified maximum number of training updates, we investigate the convergence of the backpropagation algorithm with respect to a) the complexity of the required function approximation, b) the size of the network in relation to the size required for an optimal solution, and c) the degree of noise in the training data. In general, for a) the solution found is worse when the function to be approximated is more complex, for b) oversized networks can result in lower training and generalization error in certain cases, and for c) the use of committee or ensemble techniques can be more beneficial as the level of noise in the training data is increased. For the experiments we performed, we do not obtain the optimal solution in any case. We further support the observation that larger networks can produce better training and generalization error using a face recognition example where a network with many more parameters than training points generalizes better than smaller networks. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #714256. 	[Title] A Probabilistic Calculus of Actions [Abstract] We present a symbolic machinery that admits both probabilistic and causal information about a given domain, and produces probabilistic statements about the effect of actions and the impact of observations. The calculus admits two types of conditioning operators: ordinary Bayes conditioning, P (yjX = x), which represents the observation X = x, and causal conditioning, P (yjdo(X = x)), read: the probability of Y = y conditioned on holding X constant (at x) by deliberate action. Given a mixture of such observational and causal sentences, together with the topology of the causal graph, the calculus derives new conditional probabilities of both types, thus enabling one to quantify the effects of actions and observations. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #137873. 	[Title] Stacked Density Estimation [Abstract] Technical Report No. 97-36, Information and Computer Science Department, University of California, Irvine Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #158098. 	[Title] An Alternative Markov Property for Chain Graphs [Abstract] Graphical Markov models use graphs, either undirected, directed, or mixed, to represent possible dependences among statistical variables. Applications of undirected graphs (UDGs) include models for spatial dependence and image analysis, while acyclic directed graphs (ADGs), which are especially convenient for statistical analysis, arise in such fields as genetics and psychometrics and as models for expert systems and Bayesian belief networks. Lauritzen, Wer-muth, and Frydenberg (LWF) introduced a Markov property for chain graphs, which are mixed graphs that can be used to represent simultaneously both causal and associative dependencies and which include both UDGs and ADGs as special cases. In this paper an alternative Markov property (AMP) for chain graphs is introduced, which in some ways is a more direct extension of the ADG Markov property than is the LWF property for chain graph. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #193932. 	[Title] Lessons in Neural Network Training: Overfitting Lessons in Neural Network Training: Overfitting May be Harder [Abstract] For many reasons, neural networks have become very popular AI machine learning models. Two of the most important aspects of machine learning models are how well the model generalizes to unseen data, and how well the model scales with problem complexity. Using a controlled task with known optimal training error, we investigate the convergence of the backpropagation (BP) algorithm. We find that the optimal solution is typically not found. Furthermore, we observe that networks larger than might be expected can result in lower training and generalization error. This result is supported by another real world example. We further investigate the training behavior by analyzing the weights in trained networks (excess degrees of freedom are seen to do little harm and to aid convergence), and contrasting the interpolation characteristics of multi-layer perceptron neural networks (MLPs) and polynomial models (overfitting behavior is very different the MLP is often biased towards smoother solutions). Finally, we analyze relevant theory outlining the reasons for significant practical differences. These results bring into question common beliefs about neural network training regarding convergence and optimal network size, suggest alternate guidelines for practical use (lower fear of excess degrees of freedom), and help to direct future work (e.g. methods for creation of more parsimonious solutions, importance of the MLP/BP bias and possibly worse performance of improved training algorithms). Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #531348. 	[Title] Learning Belief Networks from Data: An Information Theory Based Approach [Abstract] This paper presents an efficient algorithm for learning Bayesian belief networks from databases. The algorithm takes a database as input and constructs the belief network structure as output. The construction process is based on the computation of mutual information of attribute pairs. Given a data set that is large enough, this algorithm can generate a belief network very close to the underlying model, and at the same time, enjoys the time When the data set has a normal DAG-Faithful (see Section 3.2) probability distribution, the algorithm guarantees that the structure of a perfect map [Pearl, 1988] of the underlying dependency model is generated. To evaluate this algorithm, we present the experimental results on three versions of the well-known ALARM network database, which has 37 attributes and 10,000 records. The results show that this algorithm is accurate and efficient. The proof of correctness and the analysis of complexity of O N( ) 4 on conditional independence (CI) tests. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #531351. 	[Title] An Algorithm for Bayesian Belief Network Construction from Data [Abstract] This paper presents an efficient algorithm for constructing Bayesian belief networks from databases. The algorithm takes a database and an attributes ordering (i.e., the causal attributes of an attribute should appear earlier in the order) as input and constructs a belief network structure as output. The construction process is based on the computation of mutual information of attribute pairs. Given a data set which is large enough and has a DAG-Isomorphic probability distribution, this algorithm guarantees that the perfect map [1] of the underlying dependency tests. To evaluate this algorithm, we present the experimental results on three versions of the well-known ALARM network database, which has 37 attributes and 10,000 records. The correctness proof and the analysis of computational complexity are also presented. We also discuss the features of our work and relate it to previous works. model is generated, and at the same time, enjoys the time complexity of O N( ) 2 on conditional independence (CI) Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #118682. 	[Title] Learning Goal Oriented Bayesian Networks for Telecommunications Risk Management [Abstract] This paper discusses issues related to Bayesian network model learning for unbalanced binary classification tasks. In general, the primary focus of current research on Bayesian network learning systems (e.g., K2 and its variants) is on the creation of the Bayesian network structure that fits the database best. It turns out that when applied with a specific purpose in mind, such as classification, the performance of these network models may be very poor. We demonstrate that Bayesian network models should be created to meet the specific goal or purpose intended for the model. We first present a goal-oriented algorithm for constructing Bayesian networks for predicting uncollectibles in telecommunications risk-management datasets. Second, we argue and demonstrate that current Bayesian network learning methods may fail to perform satisfactorily in real life applications since they do not learn models tailored to a specific goal or purpose. Third, we discuss the performance of goal oriented K2 and its variant. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #189566. 	[Title] Introduction to the Special Section on Knowledge-Based Construction of Probabilistic and Decision Models (IEEE Transactions [Abstract] Modeling techniques developed recently in the AI and uncertain reasoning communities permit significantly more flexible specifications of probabilistic knowledge. Specifically, graphical decision-modeling formalisms|belief networks, influence diagrams, and their variants|provide compact representation of probabilistic relationships, and support inference algorithms that automatically exploit the dependence structure in such models [1, 3, 4]. These advances have brought on a resurgence of interest in computational decision systems based on normative theories of belief and preference. However, graphical decision-modeling languages are still quite limited for purposes of knowledge representation because, while they can describe the relationships among particular event instances, they cannot capture general knowledge about probabilistic relationships across classes of events. The inability to capture general knowledge is a serious impediment for those AI tasks in which the relevant factors of a decision problem cannot be enumerated in advance. A graphical decision model encodes a particular set of probabilistic dependencies, a predefined set of decision alternatives, and a specific mathematical form for a utility function. Given a properly specified model, there exist relatively efficient algorithms for calculating posterior probabilities and optimal decision policies. A range of similar cases may be handled by parametric variations of the original model. However, if the structure of dependencies, the set of available alternatives, or the form of utility function changes from situation to situation, then a fixed network representation is no longer adequate. An ideal computational decision system would possess general, broad knowledge of a domain, but would have the ability to reason about the particular circumstances of any given decision problem within the domain. One obvious approach|which we call call knowledge-based model construction (KBMC)|is to generate a decision model dynamically at run-time, based on the problem description and information received thus far. Model construction consists of selection, instantiation, and assembly of causal and associational relationships from a broad knowledge base of general relationships among domain concepts. For example, suppose we wish to develop a system to recommend appropriate actions for maintaining a computer network. The natural graphical decision model would include chance Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1131165. 	[Title] DYNAMIC CONDITIONAL INDEPENDENCE MODELS AND MARKOV CHAIN MONTE CARLO METHODS [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1105698. 	[Title] Covariate Selection in Hierarchical Models of Hospital Admission Counts: A Bayes Factor Approach 1 [Abstract] TECHNICAL REPORT No. 268 Department of Statistics, GN-22 University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 USA 1 Susan L. Rosenkranz is Pew Health Policy Postdoctoral Fellow at the Institute for Health Policy Studies, Box 0936, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, and Adrian E. Raftery is Professor of Statistics and Sociology, Department of Statistics, GN-22, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. Rosenkranz's research was supported by the National Research Service Award 5T32CA 09168-17 from the National Cancer Institute. The authors are grateful to Paula Diehr and Kevin Cain for helpful discussions. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #149669. 	[Title] Reasoning about Time and Probability [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #423463. 	[Title] Model Selection for Generalized Linear Models via GLIB, with Application to Epidemiology 1 [Abstract] 1 This is the first draft of a chapter for Bayesian Biostatistics, edited by Donald A. Berry and Darlene K. Strangl. Adrian E. Raftery is Professor of Statistics and Sociology, Department of Statistics, GN-22, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. Sylvia Richardson is Directeur de Recherche, INSERM Unite 170, 16 avenue Paul Vaillant Couturier, 94807 Villejuif CEDEX, France. Raftery's research was supported by ONR contract no. N-00014-91-J-1074, by the Ministere de la Recherche et de l'Espace, Paris, by the Universite de Paris VI, and by INRIA, Rocquencourt, France. Raftery thanks the latter two institutions, Paul Deheuvels and Gilles Celeux for hearty hospitality during his Paris sabbatical in which part of this chapter was written. The authors are grateful to Christine Montfort for excellent research assistance and to Mariette Gerber, Michel Chavance and David Madigan for helpful discussions. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #714289. 	[Title] ASPECTS OF GRAPHICAL MODELS CONNECTED WITH CAUSALITY [Abstract] This paper demonstrates the use of graphs as a mathematical tool for expressing independenices, and as a formal language for communicating and processing causal information in statistical analysis. We show how complex information about external interventions can be organized and represented graphically and, conversely, how the graphical representation can be used to facilitate quantitative predictions of the effects of interventions. We first review the Markovian account of causation and show that directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) offer an economical scheme for representing conditional independence assumptions and for deducing and displaying all the logical consequences of such assumptions. We then introduce the manipulative account of causation and show that any DAG defines a simple transformation which tells us how the probability distribution will change as a result of external interventions in the system. Using this transformation it is possible to quantify, from non-experimental data, the effects of external interventions and to specify conditions under which randomized experiments are not necessary. Finally, the paper offers a graphical interpretation for Rubin's model of causal effects, and demonstrates its equivalence to the manipulative account of causation. We exemplify the tradeoffs between the two approaches by deriving nonparametric bounds on treatment effects under conditions of imperfect compliance. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #7032. 	[Title] Combining estimates in regression and classification [Abstract] We consider the problem of how to combine a collection of general regression fit vectors in order to obtain a better predictive model. The individual fits may be from subset linear regression, ridge regression, or something more complex like a neural network. We develop a general framework for this problem and examine a recent cross-validation-based proposal called "stacking" in this context. Combination methods based on the bootstrap and analytic methods are also derived and compared in a number of examples, including best subsets regression and regression trees. Finally, we apply these ideas to classification problems where the estimated combination weights can yield insight into the structure of the problem. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1154229. 	[Title] Belief Networks Revisited [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1154232. 	[Title]  [Abstract] In the Proceedings of the Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelli- gence (UAI-94), Seattle, WA, 46-54, July 29-31, 1994. Technical Report R-213-B April, 1994 Abstract Evaluation of counterfactual queries (e.g., "If A were true, would C have been true?") is important to fault diagnosis, planning, and determination of liability. In this paper we present methods for computing the probabilities of such queries using the formulation proposed in [Balke and Pearl, 1994], where the antecedent of the query is interpreted as an external action that forces the proposition A to be true. When a prior probability is available on the causal mechanisms governing the domain, counterfactual probabilities can be evaluated precisely. However, when causal knowledge is specified as conditional probabilities on the observables, only bounds can computed. This paper develops techniques for evaluating these bounds, and demonstrates their use in two applications: (1) the determination of treatment efficacy from studies in which subjects may choose their own treatment, and (2) the determination of liability in product-safety litigation. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1154233. 	[Title] Bayesian Networks [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #308920. 	[Title] A Graphical Characterization of Lattice Conditional Independence Models [Abstract] Lattice conditional independence (LCI) models for multivariate normal data recently have been introduced for the analysis of non-monotone missing data patterns and of nonnested dependent linear regression models ( seemingly unrelated regressions). It is shown here that the class of LCI models coincides with a subclass of the class of graphical Markov models determined by acyclic digraphs (ADGs), namely, the subclass of transitive ADG models. An explicit graph - theoretic characterization of those ADGs that are Markov equivalent to some transitive ADG is obtained. This characterization allows one to determine whether a specific ADG D is Markov equivalent to some transitive ADG, hence to some LCI model, in polynomial time, without an exhaustive search of the (exponentially large) equivalence class [D ]. These results do not require the existence or positivity of joint densities. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #559804. 	[Title] On the Testability of Causal Models with Latent and Instrumental Variables [Abstract] Certain causal models involving unmeasured variables induce no independence constraints among the observed variables but imply, nevertheless, inequality constraints on the observed distribution. This paper derives a general formula for such inequality constraints as induced by instrumental variables, that is, exogenous variables that directly affect some variables but not all. With the help of this formula, it is possible to test whether a model involving instrumental variables may account for the data, or, conversely, whether a given vari able can be deemed instrumental. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #5055. 	[Title] Boosting the Margin: A New Explanation for the Effectiveness of Voting Methods [Abstract] One of the surprising recurring phenomena observed in experiments with boosting is that the test error of the generated classifier usually does not increase as its size becomes very large, and often is observed to decrease even after the training error reaches zero. In this paper, we show that this phenomenon is related to the distribution of margins of the training examples with respect to the generated voting classification rule, where the margin of an example is simply the difference between the number of correct votes and the maximum number of votes received by any incorrect label. We show that techniques used in the analysis of Vapnik's support vector classifiers and of neural networks with small weights can be applied to voting methods to relate the margin distribution to the test error. We also show theoretically and experimentally that boosting is especially effective at increasing the margins of the training examples. Finally, we compare our explanation to those based on the bias-variance decomposition. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #79809. 	[Title] MDL and MML Similarities and Differences (Introduction to Minimum Encoding Inference Part III) [Abstract] Tech Report 207 Department of Computer Science, Monash University, Clayton, Vic. 3168, Australia Abstract: This paper continues the introduction to minimum encoding inductive inference given by Oliver and Hand. This series of papers was written with the objective of providing an introduction to this area for statisticians. We describe the message length estimates used in Wallace's Minimum Message Length (MML) inference and Rissanen's Minimum Description Length (MDL) inference. The differences in the message length estimates of the two approaches are explained. The implications of these differences for applications are discussed. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1997. 	[Title] Cross-Validation and the Bootstrap: Estimating the Error Rate of a Prediction Rule [Abstract] A training set of data has been used to construct a rule for predicting future responses. What is the error rate of this rule? The traditional answer to this question is given by cross-validation. The cross-validation estimate of prediction error is nearly unbiased, but can be highly variable. This article discusses bootstrap estimates of prediction error, which can be thought of as smoothed versions of cross-validation. A particular bootstrap method, the 632+ rule, is shown to substantially outperform cross-validation in a catalog of 24 simulation experiments. Besides providing point estimates, we also consider estimating the variability of an error rate estimate. All of the results here are nonparametric, and apply to any possible prediction rule: however we only study classification problems with 0-1 loss in detail. Our simulations include "smooth" prediction rules like Fisher's Linear Discriminant Function, and unsmooth ones like Nearest Neighbors. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #39890. 	[Title] A THEORY OF INFERRED CAUSATION perceive causal relationships in uncon trolled observations. 2. the task [Abstract] This paper concerns the empirical basis of causation, and addresses the following issues: We propose a minimal-model semantics of causation, and show that, contrary to common folklore, genuine causal influences can be distinguished from spurious covariations following standard norms of inductive reasoning. We also establish a sound characterization of the conditions under which such a distinction is possible. We provide an effective algorithm for inferred causation and show that, for a large class of data the algorithm can uncover the direction of causal influences as defined above. Finally, we ad dress the issue of non-temporal causation. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #354004. 	[Title] Formal Rules for Selecting Prior Distributions: A Review and Annotated Bibliography [Abstract] Subjectivism has become the dominant philosophical foundation for Bayesian inference. Yet, in practice, most Bayesian analyses are performed with so-called "noninfor-mative" priors, that is, priors constructed by some formal rule. We review the plethora of techniques for constructing such priors, and discuss some of the practical and philosophical issues that arise when they are used. We give special emphasis to Jeffreys's rules and discuss the evolution of his point of view about the interpretation of priors, away from unique representation of ignorance toward the notion that they should be chosen by convention. We conclude that the problems raised by the research on priors chosen by formal rules are serious and may not be dismissed lightly; when sample sizes are small (relative to the number of parameters being estimated) it is dangerous to put faith in any "default" solution; but when asymptotics take over, Jeffreys's rules and their variants remain reasonable choices. We also provide an annotated bibliography. fl Robert E. Kass is Professor and Larry Wasserman is Associate Professor, Department of Statistics, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213-2717. The work of both authors was supported by NSF grant DMS-9005858 and NIH grant R01-CA54852-01. The authors thank Nick Polson for helping with a few annotations, and Jim Berger, Teddy Seidenfeld and Arnold Zellner for useful comments and discussion. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #561364. 	[Title] Markov Chain Monte Carlo Model Determination for Hierarchical and Graphical Log-linear Models [Abstract] The Bayesian approach to comparing models involves calculating the posterior probability of each plausible model. For high-dimensional contingency tables, the set of plausible models is very large. We focus attention on reversible jump Markov chain Monte Carlo (Green, 1995) and develop strategies for calculating posterior probabilities of hierarchical, graphical or decomposable log-linear models. Even for tables of moderate size, these sets of models may be very large. The choice of suitable prior distributions for model parameters is also discussed in detail, and two examples are presented. For the first example, a 2 fi 3 fi 4 table, the model probabilities calculated using our reversible jump approach are compared with model probabilities calculated exactly or by using an alternative approximation. The second example is a 2 6 contingency table for which exact methods are infeasible, due to the large number of possible models. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #310742. 	[Title] Bayesian Graphical Modeling for Intelligent Tutoring Systems [Abstract] Conventional Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) do not acknowledge uncertainty about the student's knowledge. Yet, both the outcome of any teaching intervention and the exact state of the student's knowledge are uncertain. In recent years, researchers have made startling progress in the management of uncertainty in knowledge-based systems. Building on these developments, we describe an ITS architecture that explicitly models uncertainty. This will facilitate more accurate student modeling and provide ITS's which can learn. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #5086. 	[Title] Approximate Bayes Factors and Accounting for Model Uncertainty in Generalized Linear Models [Abstract] Technical Report no. 255 Department of Statistics, University of Washington August 1993; Revised March 1994 Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #714975. 	[Title] Using Path Diagrams as a Structural Equation Modelling Tool [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1106789. 	[Title] Model Selection for Consumer Loan Application Data [Abstract] Loan applications at banks are often long, requiring the applicant to provide large amounts of data. Is all of it necessary? Can we save the applicant some frustration and the bank some expense by using only a subset of the relevant variables? To answer this question, I have attempted to model the current loan approval process at a particular bank. I have used several model selection techniques for logistic regression, including stepwise regression, Occam's Window, Markov Chain Monte Carlo Model Composition (Raftery, Madigan, and Hoeting, 1993), and Bayesian Random Searching. The resulting models largely agree upon a subset of only one-third of the original variables. fl This paper was completed in partial fulfillment of the Ph.D. data analysis requirement. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #154982. 	[Title] Bias, variance and prediction error for classification rules [Abstract] We study the notions of bias and variance for classification rules. Following Efron (1978) we develop a decomposition of prediction error into its natural components. Then we derive bootstrap estimates of these components and illustrate how they can be used to describe the error behaviour of a classifier in practice. In the process we also obtain a bootstrap estimate of the error of a "bagged" classifier. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #242663. 	[Title] Two Algorithms for Inducing Structural Equation Models from Data [Abstract] We present two algorithms for inducing structural equation models from data. Assuming no latent variables, these models have a causal interpretation and their parameters may be estimated by linear multiple regression. Our algorithms are comparable with PC [15] and IC [12, 11], which rely on conditional independence. We present the algorithms and empirical comparisons with PC and IC. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #162664. 	[Title] An Algorithm for the Construction of Bayesian Network Structures from Data [Abstract] Previous algorithms for the construction of Bayesian belief network structures from data have been either highly dependent on conditional independence (CI) tests, or have required an ordering on the nodes to be supplied by the user. We present an algorithm that integrates these two approaches - CI tests are used to generate an ordering on the nodes from the database which is then used to recover the underlying Bayesian network structure using a non CI based method. Results of preliminary evaluation of the algorithm on two networks (ALARM and LED) are presented. We also discuss some algo rithm performance issues and open problems. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1123689. 	[Title] A Parallel Learning Algorithm for Bayesian Inference Networks [Abstract] We present a new parallel algorithm for learning Bayesian inference networks from data. Our learning algorithm exploits both properties of the MDL-based score metric, and a distributed, asynchronous, adaptive search technique called nagging. Nagging is intrinsically fault tolerant, has dynamic load balancing features, and scales well. We demonstrate the viability, effectiveness, and scalability of our approach empirically with several experiments using on the order of 20 machines. More specifically, we show that our distributed algorithm can provide optimal solutions for larger problems as well as good solutions for Bayesian networks of up to 150 variables. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1127530. 	[Title] Bayesian inference for nondecomposable graphical Gaussian models [Abstract] In this paper we propose a method to calculate the posterior probability of a nondecomposable graphical Gaussian model. Our proposal is based on a new device to sample from Wishart distributions, conditional on the graphical constraints. As a result, our methodology allows Bayesian model selection within the whole class of graphical Gaussian models, including nondecomposable ones. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #4330. 	[Title] Hierarchical Mixtures of Experts and the EM Algorithm [Abstract] We present a tree-structured architecture for supervised learning. The statistical model underlying the architecture is a hierarchical mixture model in which both the mixture coefficients and the mixture components are generalized linear models (GLIM's). Learning is treated as a maximum likelihood problem; in particular, we present an Expectation-Maximization (EM) algorithm for adjusting the parameters of the architecture. We also develop an on-line learning algorithm in which the parameters are updated incrementally. Comparative simulation results are presented in the robot dynamics domain. This report describes research done at the Dept. of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, the Center for Biological and Computational Learning, and the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Support for CBCL is provided in part by a grant from the NSF (ASC-9217041). Support for the laboratory's artificial intelligence research is provided in part by the Advanced Research Projects Agency of the Dept. of Defense. The authors were supported by a grant from the McDonnell-Pew Foundation, by a grant from ATR Human Information Processing Research Laboratories, by a grant from Siemens Corporation, by by grant IRI-9013991 from the National Science Foundation, by grant N00014-90-J-1942 from the Office of Naval Research, and by NSF grant ECS-9216531 to support an Initiative in Intelligent Control at MIT. Michael I. Jordan is a NSF Presidential Young Investigator. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #129896. 	[Title] Accounting for Model Uncertainty in Survival Analysis Improves Predictive Performance [Abstract] Survival analysis is concerned with finding models to predict the survival of patients or to assess the efficacy of a clinical treatment. A key part of the model-building process is the selection of the predictor variables. It is standard to use a stepwise procedure guided by a series of significance tests to select a single model, and then to make inference conditionally on the selected model. However, this ignores model uncertainty, which can be substantial. We review the standard Bayesian model averaging solution to this problem and extend it to survival analysis, introducing partial Bayes factors to do so for the Cox proportional hazards model. In two examples, taking account of model uncertainty enhances predictive performance, to an extent that could be clinically useful. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #51045. 	[Title] Regression Can Build Predictive Causal Models [Abstract] Covariance information can help an algorithm search for predictive causal models and estimate the strengths of causal relationships. This information should not be discarded after conditional independence constraints are identified, as is usual in contemporary causal induction algorithms. Our fbd algorithm combines covariance information with an effective heuristic to build predictive causal models. We demonstrate that fbd is accurate and efficient. In one experiment we assess fbd's ability to find the best predictors for variables; in another we compare its performance, using many measures, with Pearl and Verma's ic algorithm. And although fbd is based on multiple linear regression, we cite evidence that it performs well on problems that are very difficult for regression algorithms. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #129897. 	[Title] The out-of-bootstrap method for model averaging and selection [Abstract] We propose a bootstrap-based method for model averaging and selection that focuses on training points that are left out of individual bootstrap samples. This information can be used to estimate optimal weighting factors for combining estimates from different bootstrap samples, and also for finding the best subsets the linear model setting. These proposals provide alternatives to Bayesian approaches to model averaging and selection, requiring less computation and fewer subjective choices. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #440815. 	[Title] Change Point and Change Curve Modeling in Stochastic Processes and Spatial Statistics [Abstract] 1 This article will appear in Volume 1, no. 4 (1994) of Journal of Applied Statistical Science. Adrian E. Raftery is Professor of Statistics and Sociology, Department of Statistics, GN-22, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. This research was supported by ONR contract no. N-00014-91-J-1074, by NIH Grant no. 5R01HD26330-02, by the Ministere de la Recherche et de l'Espace, Paris, by the Universite de Paris VI, and by INRIA, Rocquencourt, France. Raftery thanks the latter two institutions, Paul Deheuvels and Gilles Celeux for hearty hospitality during his Paris sabbatical in which this article was written. This article was prepared for presentation at the Conference on Applied Change Point Analysis, University of Maryland-Baltimore, March 17-18, 1993. Parts of this article review collaborative research with others to whom I would like to express my appreciation, namely Volkan Akman, Jeff Banfield, Nhu Le, Steven Lewis, Doug Martin, Fionn Murtagh, Ross Taplin and Simon Tavare. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #15984. 	[Title] On the Markov Equivalence of Chain Graphs, Undirected Graphs, and Acyclic Digraphs [Abstract] Graphical Markov models use undirected graphs (UDGs), acyclic directed graphs (ADGs), or (mixed) chain graphs to represent possible dependencies among random variables in a multivariate distribution. Whereas a UDG is uniquely determined by its associated Markov model, this is not true for ADGs or for general chain graphs (which include both UDGs and ADGs as special cases). This paper addresses three questions regarding the equivalence of graphical Markov models: when is a given chain graph Markov equivalent (1) to some UDG? (2) to some (at least one) ADG? (3) to some decomposable UDG? The answers are obtained by means of an extension of Frydenberg's (1990) elegant graph-theoretic characterization of the Markov equivalence of chain graphs. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #51049. 	[Title] Causal inference, path analysis, and recursive struc-tural equations models. In C. Clogg, editor, Sociological Methodology, [Abstract] Lipid Research Clinic Program 84] Lipid Research Clinic Program. The Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial results, parts I and II. Journal of the American Medical Association, 251(3):351-374, January 1984. [Pearl 93] Judea Pearl. Aspects of graphical models connected with causality. Technical Report R-195-LL, Cognitive Systems Laboratory, UCLA, June 1993. Submitted to Biometrika (June 1993). Short version in Proceedings of the 49th Session of the International Statistical Institute: Invited papers, Flo rence, Italy, August 1993, Tome LV, Book 1, pp. 391-401. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #15987. 	[Title] "Linear Dependencies Represented by Chain Graphs," "Graphical Modelling With MIM," Manual. "Identifying Independence in Bayesian [Abstract] 8] Dori, D. and Tarsi, M., "A Simple Algorithm to Construct a Consistent Extension of a Partially Oriented Graph," Computer Science Department, Tel-Aviv University. Also Technical Report R-185, UCLA, Cognitive Systems Laboratory, October 1992. [14] Pearl, J. and Wermuth, N., "When Can Association Graphs Admit a Causal Interpretation?," UCLA, Cognitive Systems Laboratory, Technical Report R-183-L, November 1992. [17] Verma, T.S. and Pearl, J., "Deciding Morality of Graphs is NP-complete," Technical Report R-188, UCLA, Cognitive Systems Laboratory, October 1992. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3187. 	[Title] A Reference Bayesian Test for Nested Hypotheses And its Relationship to the Schwarz Criterion [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3192. 	[Title] Bayesian Graphical Models for Discrete Data [Abstract] z York's research was supported by a NSF graduate fellowship. The authors are grateful to Julian Besag, David Bradshaw, Jeff Bradshaw, James Carlsen, David Draper, Ivar Heuch, Robert Kass, Augustine Kong, Steffen Lauritzen, Adrian Raftery, and James Zidek for helpful comments and discussions. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #137849. 	[Title] Inference in Model-Based Cluster Analysis [Abstract] Technical Report no. 285 Department of Statistics University of Washington. March 10, 1995 Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1105531. 	[Title] Belief Networks, Hidden Markov Models, and Markov Random Fields: a Unifying View [Abstract] The use of graphs to represent independence structure in multivariate probability models has been pursued in a relatively independent fashion across a wide variety of research disciplines since the beginning of this century. This paper provides a brief overview of the current status of such research with particular attention to recent developments which have served to unify such seemingly disparate topics as probabilistic expert systems, statistical physics, image analysis, genetics, decoding of error-correcting codes, Kalman filters, and speech recognition with Markov models. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #39165. 	[Title] Efficient Learning of Selective Bayesian Network Classifiers [Abstract] In this paper, we present a computation-ally efficient method for inducing selective Bayesian network classifiers. Our approach is to use information-theoretic metrics to efficiently select a subset of attributes from which to learn the classifier. We explore three conditional, information-theoretic met-rics that are extensions of metrics used extensively in decision tree learning, namely Quin-lan's gain and gain ratio metrics and Man-taras's distance metric. We experimentally show that the algorithms based on gain ratio and distance metric learn selective Bayesian networks that have predictive accuracies as good as or better than those learned by existing selective Bayesian network induction approaches (K2-AS), but at a significantly lower computational cost. We prove that the subset-selection phase of these information-based algorithms has polynomial complexity, as compared to the worst-case exponential time complexity of the corresponding phase in K2-AS. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #510718. 	[Title] Learning Bayesian Networks from Incomplete Data [Abstract] Much of the current research in learning Bayesian Networks fails to effectively deal with missing data. Most of the methods assume that the data is complete, or make the data complete using fairly ad-hoc methods; other methods do deal with missing data but learn only the conditional probabilities, assuming that the structure is known. We present a principled approach to learn both the Bayesian network structure as well as the conditional probabilities from incomplete data. The proposed algorithm is an iterative method that uses a combination of Expectation-Maximization (EM) and Imputation techniques. Results are presented on synthetic data sets which show that the performance of the new algorithm is much better than ad-hoc methods for handling missing data. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #521855. 	[Title] Decision-Theoretic Foundations for Causal Reasoning [Abstract] We present a definition of cause and effect in terms of decision-theoretic primitives and thereby provide a principled foundation for causal reasoning. Our definition departs from the traditional view of causation in that causal assertions may vary with the set of decisions available. We argue that this approach provides added clarity to the notion of cause. Also in this paper, we examine the encoding of causal relationships in directed acyclic graphs. We describe a special class of influence diagrams, those in canonical form, and show its relationship to Pearl's representation of cause and effect. Finally, we show how canonical form facilitates counterfactual reasoning. Please summarise all the given information.

Paper #3191 has the title `Model Selection and Accounting for Model Uncertainty in Linear Regression Models  
` and the abstract `1 Adrian E. Raftery is Professor of Statistics and Sociology, David Madigan is Assistant Professor of Statistics, and Jennifer Hoeting is a Ph.D. Candidate, all at the Department of Statistics, GN-22, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. The research of Raftery and Hoeting was supported by ONR Contract N-00014-91-J-1074. Madigan's research was partially supported by NSF grant no. DMS 92111627. The authors are grateful to Danika Lew for research assistance. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #3191 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #3191 has the title `Model Selection and Accounting for Model Uncertainty in Linear Regression Models  
` and the abstract `1 Adrian E. Raftery is Professor of Statistics and Sociology, David Madigan is Assistant Professor of Statistics, and Jennifer Hoeting is a Ph.D. Candidate, all at the Department of Statistics, GN-22, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. The research of Raftery and Hoeting was supported by ONR Contract N-00014-91-J-1074. Madigan's research was partially supported by NSF grant no. DMS 92111627. The authors are grateful to Danika Lew for research assistance. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #3191 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].

This paper should be classified into: Probabilistic_Methods