We propose a Goodness of Causal Fit (GCF) measure which depends on Judea Pearl's ``do" interventions. This is different from Goodness of Fit (GF) measures, which do not use interventions. Given a set ${\cal G}$ of DAGs with the same nodes, to find a good $G\in {\cal G}$, we propose plotting $GCF(G)$ versus $GF(G)$ for all $G\in {\cal G}$, and finding a graph $G\in {\cal G}$ with a large amount of both types of goodness.
翻译:我们建议采用一个取决于Judea Pearl的“做”干预的“做”措施的“好”措施,这与不使用干预的“做”措施的“好”措施不同。 鉴于一套具有相同节点的DAG$(cal G),我们建议为所有G$(G)相对于G$(G)的“做”措施,我们建议为所有G$(G)和G$(G)的“做”计划,并找到一个具有大量两种“好”的G$(cal G)的图表($G) (cal G) 。