Lu Chenguang
Intelligence Engineering and Mathematics Institute, Liaoning Technical University, Fuxin 123000, China.
School of Computer Engineering and Applied Mathematics, Changsha University, Changsha 410022, China.
Entropy (Basel). 2023 Jan 10;25(1):143. doi: 10.3390/e25010143.
When we compare the influences of two causes on an outcome, if the conclusion from every group is against that from the conflation, we think there is Simpson's Paradox. The Existing Causal Inference Theory (ECIT) can make the overall conclusion consistent with the grouping conclusion by removing the confounder's influence to eliminate the paradox. The ECIT uses relative risk difference = max(0, ( - 1)/) ( denotes the risk ratio) as the probability of causation. In contrast, Philosopher Fitelson uses confirmation measure (posterior probability minus prior probability) to measure the strength of causation. Fitelson concludes that from the perspective of Bayesian confirmation, we should directly accept the overall conclusion without considering the paradox. The author proposed a Bayesian confirmation measure * similar to before. To overcome the contradiction between the ECIT and Bayesian confirmation, the author uses the semantic information method with the minimum cross-entropy criterion to deduce causal confirmation measure = ( - 1)/max(, 1). is like but has normalizing property (between -1 and 1) and cause symmetry. It especially fits cases where a cause restrains an outcome, such as the COVID-19 vaccine controlling the infection. Some examples (about kidney stone treatments and COVID-19) reveal that and are more reasonable than ; is more useful than .
当我们比较两种病因对某一结果的影响时,如果每组得出的结论与合并后的结论相悖,我们就认为存在辛普森悖论。现有的因果推断理论(ECIT)可以通过消除混杂因素的影响使总体结论与分组结论保持一致,从而消除该悖论。ECIT使用相对风险差=max(0, ( - 1)/)(表示风险比)作为因果关系的概率。相比之下,哲学家菲特尔森使用确证度量(后验概率减去先验概率)来衡量因果关系的强度。菲特尔森得出结论,从贝叶斯确证的角度来看,我们应该直接接受总体结论而不考虑该悖论。作者之前提出了一种类似于的贝叶斯确证度量*。为了克服ECIT与贝叶斯确证之间的矛盾,作者使用具有最小交叉熵准则的语义信息方法推导出因果确证度量 = ( - 1)/max(, 1)。类似于,但具有归一化性质(在-1和1之间)且具有原因对称性。它特别适用于某一病因抑制某一结果的情况,比如新冠疫苗控制感染。一些例子(关于肾结石治疗和新冠)表明,和比更合理;比更有用。