The Blessings of Multiple Causes: A Reply to Ogburn et al. (2019)
Yixin Wang, David M. Blei
TL;DR
This paper defends the validity of the multiple causes framework against criticisms, asserting that the original premise is correct and that there are no foundational errors in the prior work.
Contribution
It provides a rebuttal to claims of errors in the original multiple causes paper, reaffirming the correctness of its premise and addressing criticisms.
Findings
No foundational errors found in the original work
The premise of multiple causes modeling is correct
Criticisms are unsubstantiated
Abstract
Ogburn et al. (2019, arXiv:1910.05438) discuss "The Blessings of Multiple Causes" (Wang and Blei, 2018, arXiv:1805.06826). Many of their remarks are interesting. But they also claim that the paper has "foundational errors" and that its "premise is...incorrect." These claims are not substantiated. There are no foundational errors; the premise is correct.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMental Health Research Topics · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Advanced Statistical Methods and Models