Combining experts' causal judgments

Consider a policymaker who wants to decide which intervention to perform in order to change a currently undesirable situation. The policymaker has at her disposal a team of experts, each with their own understanding of the causal dependencies between different factors contributing to the outcome. Th...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Artificial intelligence 2020-11, Vol.288, p.103355, Article 103355
Main Authors: Alrajeh, Dalal, Chockler, Hana, Halpern, Joseph Y.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Causality
Combining causal judgments
Complexity
Intervention
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Consider a policymaker who wants to decide which intervention to perform in order to change a currently undesirable situation. The policymaker has at her disposal a team of experts, each with their own understanding of the causal dependencies between different factors contributing to the outcome. The policymaker has varying degrees of confidence in the experts' opinions. She wants to combine their opinions in order to decide on the most effective intervention. We formally define the notion of an effective intervention, and then consider how experts' causal judgments can be combined in order to determine the most effective intervention. We define a notion of two causal models being compatible, and show how compatible causal models can be merged. We then use it as the basis for combining experts' causal judgments. We also provide a definition of decomposition for causal models to cater for cases when models are incompatible. We illustrate our approach on a number of real-life examples.
ISSN:0004-3702
1872-7921
DOI:10.1016/j.artint.2020.103355