Causal and attribution studies are essential for earth scientific discoveries and critical for informing climate, ecology, and water policies. However, the current generation of methods needs to keep pace with the complexity of scientific and stakeholder challenges and data availability combined with the adequacy of data-driven methods. Unless carefully informed by physics, they run the risk of conflating correlation with causation or getting overwhelmed by estimation inaccuracies. Given that natural experiments, controlled trials, interventions, and counterfactual examinations are often impractical, information-theoretic methods have been developed and are being continually refined in the earth sciences. Here we show that transfer entropy-based causal graphs, which have recently become popular in the earth sciences with high-profile discoveries, can be spurious even when augmented with statistical significance. We develop a subsample-based ensemble approach for robust causality analysis. Simulated data, and observations in climate and ecohydrology, suggest the robustness and consistency of this approach.
翻译:原因和归因研究对于地球科学发现至关重要,对于为气候、生态和水政策提供信息至关重要。然而,目前这一代方法需要跟上科学和利益攸关方挑战的复杂性和数据提供以及数据驱动方法的充足性。除非由物理学仔细了解,否则它们有可能与因果关系混为一谈,或因不准确性估计而不堪重负。鉴于自然实验、控制试验、干预和反事实检查往往不切实际,信息理论方法已经开发,并在地球科学中不断完善。我们在这里表明,基于诱因性的诱因图的转移,最近在地球科学中广为流行的、具有高知名度发现的数据,即使具有统计意义,也可能是虚假的。我们为稳健的因果关系分析制定了基于子抽样的共性共同方法。模拟数据以及气候和生态水文学方面的观察,表明这一方法的稳健性和一致性。