Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1134320. 	[Title] UNIVERSAL FORMULAS FOR TREATMENT EFFECTS FROM NONCOMPLIANCE DATA [Abstract] This paper establishes formulas that can be used to bound the actual treatment effect in any experimental study in which treatment assignment is random but subject compliance is imperfect. These formulas provide the tightest bounds on the average treatment effect that can be inferred given the distribution of assignments, treatments, and responses. Our results reveal that even with high rates of noncompliance, experimental data can yield significant and sometimes accurate information on the effect of a treatment on the population. 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 #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 #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 #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 #73162. 	[Title] Causal diagrams for empirical research [Abstract] The primary aim of this paper is to show how graphical models can be used as a mathematical language for integrating statistical and subject-matter information. In particular, the paper develops a principled, nonparametric framework for causal inference, in which diagrams are queried to determine if the assumptions available are sufficient for identifying causal effects from nonexperimental data. If so the diagrams can be queried to produce mathematical expressions for causal effects in terms of observed distributions; otherwise, the diagrams can be queried to suggest additional observations or auxiliary experiments from which the desired inferences can be obtained. Key words: Causal inference, graph models, structural equations, treatment effect. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1134348. 	[Title] On The Foundation Of Structural Equation Models or [Abstract] When Can We Give Causal Interpretation Abstract The assumptions underlying statistical estimation are of fundamentally different character from the causal assumptions that underly structural equation models (SEM). The differences have been blurred through the years for the lack of a mathematical notation capable of distinguishing causal from equational relationships. Recent advances in graphical methods provide formal explication of these differences, and are destined to have profound impact on SEM's practice and philosophy. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #714748. 	[Title] CAUSATION, ACTION, AND COUNTERFACTUALS [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #189774. 	[Title] Causal Inference from Indirect Experiments [Abstract] Indirect experiments are studies in which randomized control is replaced by randomized encouragement, that is, subjects are encouraged, rather than forced to receive treatment programs. The purpose of this paper is to bring to the attention of experimental researchers simple mathematical results that enable us to assess, from indirect experiments, the strength with which causal influences operate among variables of interest. The results reveal that despite the laxity of the encouraging instrument, indirect experimentation can yield significant and sometimes accurate information on the impact of a program on the population as a whole, as well as on the particular individuals who participated in the program. 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 #714260. 	[Title] Probabilistic evaluation of sequential plans from causal models with hidden variables [Abstract] The paper concerns the probabilistic evaluation of plans in the presence of unmeasured variables, each plan consisting of several concurrent or sequential actions. We establish a graphical criterion for recognizing when the effects of a given plan can be predicted from passive observations on measured variables only. When the criterion is satisfied, a closed-form expression is provided for the probability that the plan will achieve a specified goal. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #714879. 	[Title] The New Challenge: From a Century of Statistics to an Age of Causation [Abstract] Some of the main users of statistical methods - economists, social scientists, and epidemiologists are discovering that their fields rest not on statistical but on causal foundations. The blurring of these foundations over the years follows from the lack of mathematical notation capable of distinguishing causal from equational relationships. By providing formal and natural explication of such relations, graphical methods have the potential to revolutionize how statistics is used in knowledge-rich applications. Statisticians, in response, are beginning to realize that causality is not a metaphysical dead-end but a meaningful concept with clear mathematical underpinning. The paper surveys these developments and outlines future challenges. 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 #519353. 	[Title] Defining Explanation in Probabilistic Systems [Abstract] As probabilistic systems gain popularity and are coming into wider use, the need for a mechanism that explains the system's findings and recommendations becomes more critical. The system will also need a mechanism for ordering competing explanations. We examine two representative approaches to explanation in the literature one due to G ardenfors and one due to Pearland show that both suffer from significant problems. We propose an approach to defining a notion of better explanation that combines some of the features of both together with more recent work by Pearl and others on causality. 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 #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 #1134320 has the title `UNIVERSAL FORMULAS FOR TREATMENT EFFECTS FROM NONCOMPLIANCE DATA  
` and the abstract `This paper establishes formulas that can be used to bound the actual treatment effect in any experimental study in which treatment assignment is random but subject compliance is imperfect. These formulas provide the tightest bounds on the average treatment effect that can be inferred given the distribution of assignments, treatments, and responses. Our results reveal that even with high rates of noncompliance, experimental data can yield significant and sometimes accurate information on the effect of a treatment on the population.
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #1134320 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #1134320 has the title `UNIVERSAL FORMULAS FOR TREATMENT EFFECTS FROM NONCOMPLIANCE DATA  
` and the abstract `This paper establishes formulas that can be used to bound the actual treatment effect in any experimental study in which treatment assignment is random but subject compliance is imperfect. These formulas provide the tightest bounds on the average treatment effect that can be inferred given the distribution of assignments, treatments, and responses. Our results reveal that even with high rates of noncompliance, experimental data can yield significant and sometimes accurate information on the effect of a treatment on the population.
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #1134320 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