Aggregating Causal Judgements
نویسندگان
چکیده
Decision making typically requires judgements about causal relations: we need to know both the causal e¤ects of our actions and the causal relevance of various environmental factors. Judgements about the nature and strength of causal relations often di¤er, even among experts. How to handle such diversity is the topic of this paper. First we consider the possibility of aggregating causal judgements via the aggregation of probabilistic ones. The broadly negative outcome of this investigation leads us to look at aggregating causal judgements independently of probabilistic ones. We do so by transcribing causal claims into the judgement aggregation framework and applying some recent results in this eld. Finally we look at the implications for probability aggregation when it is constrained by prior aggregation of causal judgements.
منابع مشابه
University of Groningen Logical Constraints on Judgement Aggregation
Logical puzzles like the doctrinal paradox raise the problem of how to aggregate individual judgements into a collective judgement, or alternatively, how to merge collectively inconsistent knowledge bases. In this paper, we view judgement aggregation as a function on propositional logic valuations, and we investigate how logic constrains judgement aggregation. In particular, we show that there ...
متن کاملAggregating Judgements by Merging Evidence
The theory of belief revision and merging has recently been applied to judgement aggregation. In this paper I argue that judgements are best aggregated by merging the evidence on which they are based, rather than by directly merging the judgements themselves. This leads to a threestep strategy for judgement aggregation. First, merge the evidence bases of the various agents using some method of ...
متن کاملNormative and descriptive accounts of the influence of power and contingency on causal judgement.
The power PC theory (Cheng, 1997) is a normative account of causal inference, which predicts that causal judgements are based on the power p of a potential cause, where p is the cause-effect contingency normalized by the base rate of the effect. In three experiments we demonstrate that both cause-effect contingency and effect base-rate independently affect estimates in causal learning tasks. In...
متن کاملAggregating Causal Judgments
Decision-making typically requires judgments about causal relations: we need to know the causal e§ects of our actions and the causal relevance of various environmental factors. We investigate how several individualsí causal judgments can be aggregated into collective causal judgments. First, we consider the aggregation of causal judgments via the aggregation of probabilistic judgments, and iden...
متن کاملHuman Judgements on Causation in French Texts
The annotation of causal relations in natural language texts can lead to a low inter-annotator agreement. A French corpus annotated with causal relations would be helpful for the evaluation of programs that extract causal knowledge, as well as for the study of the expression of causation. As previous theoretical work provides no necessary and sufficient condition that would allow an annotator t...
متن کامل